Save St. Petersburg’s Vigilante Hero

A great story swiped from Sploid:

A St. Petersburg man is lucky to be alive today after attempting one of the most ill-fated car thefts ever.

Randy H. Colby, 44, sped off in a white Chevy pick up stolen from the lot of an auto shop. As he approached a red light, he rear-ended the Nissan truck ahead him, necessitating yet another getaway.

Unluckily for Colby, that Nissan was driven by William McArthur Sams, 27, a man with a short temper and a semiautomatic handgun.

Sams gave chase, catching up with Colby at a traffic light. This time Colby backed into Sams before taking off.

At the next light Sams grabbed his gun and ran after Colby.

“Mr. Sams beat on the side of the pickup and then fired one round at one of the driver’s side tires, deflating the tire,” a report said.

An officer on the scene pulled her gun and order Sams to put down his gun. Before dropping his weapon Sams squeezed off another round, deflating the other front tire.

A desperate Colby made a sad effort to get away with two flat tires. It was only a matter of time before he was caught.

Colby is in jail facing charges of auto theft and aggravated assault with a motor vehicle.

Sams has not yet been charged with anything, though an investigation is underway.

While it’s a good chance Sams may get off the hook, he may in fact be charged with discharging a firearm or some other stupid charge. In an effort to kill that possibility in the crib and give a big thanks to our neighborhood vigilante heroes, how about calling the St. Petersburg Police Department and asking that Sams be let go: 727-893-7780

Or alternately, St Petersburg’s Mayor’s office at 727-893-7201

29 Comments
  1. Sams is a hero and he should be given an award. He should be personally thanked by the police department and local elected officials…

    I beleive that America would be a far safer place if every American owned a gun and knew how to use their firearms…

    Mike Sylvester

  2. I’d have been tempted to discharge two rounds, too: one in Colby’s left foot, the other in his right foot.

  3. My type of guy. We could save a ton of money now spent on law enforcement if every law abiding citizen with no felony convictions were allowed to be armed to the hilt while in public. The stress level of criminals would skyrocket for good reason.

  4. With no felony convictions? So, just make everything a felony and make people ask permission to excercise what used to be a right and is now merely a priveledge. And “… if… were allowed” – ALLOWED by whom? Who is the “whom” who is the arbiter of our rights? Dumb conservative.

    If they can be trusted to be out of jail, then they can be trusted with their rights. And of course ending the war on drugs etc etc would empty our jails so that even hot chicks that molest little boys are more apt to go to jail where they belong.

    Right now, you rip someone off, slap on the wrist. You smoke a joint, throw away the key.

  5. I’m proud to not be a law abiding citizen. It’s my duty as a good American to break bad laws. And most of them are bad.

  6. Devious David

    You must be one of those anarchists disguised as a libertarian. Why don’t you just leave the libertarian movement and be what you are, an anarchist in the anarchist party and quit trying to hijack the Party.

    You are proof that we need the LRC more than ever so we can win elections instead of being bystanders critizing the two major parties. I am choosing to be proactive and win some elections albiet it is at the local level and not at the top down as you probably prefer.

    I try to tolerate people like you and have decided to be an active libertarian but you 13 percenters are doing more harm to the libertarian movement than good.

    I can read the future on your comment so don’t even try to accuse me of being a NEOCON, a word I hate anyway because I have declared myself a libertarian in every way even though I disagree with the radical wing of the Party which you are obviously a member.

    I do not believe convicted felons have the right to pack.

  7. Ian Bernard

    I obviously have just read a comment by another 13 percenter. Do you break all the laws are just the ones that are not to your liking? How do you choose which ones you will disregard? If you believe rape and torture is a way to get off, would you also break laws against that type of behaviour?

    I just cannot believe how radical some of you can get in your belief systems. That is not libertarianism, that is anarchy and utter disregard for others rights and beliefs.

    It seems to me you would have more success working to change or eliminate the laws you believe are unjust than to just arbitrarily break them. The prisons are full of people who believed laws did not apply to them. What good will you do anyone including yourself sitting in prison?

    Rational thinking disappears sometimes amongst some of the radical fringe libertarians.

  8. Julian, you are a deeply confused person. That is the very definition of a conservative and so it is.

    As I have said before, I have no problem with people who are less radical than me. The problem is that people less radical than me would rather I jump off a cliff. That means that radicals must push “reformers” (the most confused of conservatives) off that cliff first. If that devisiveness means less immediate and even intermediate “progress” towards liberty, than so be it. Because it is not liberty that you would practically or rationally achieve without radical principle. You must understand that what you are calling for would equate with what we already have now. Further, it is people such as yourself who are “hijacking”.

    There is a place for political action, however politics (in particular, as usual) will not be the final arbiter of a libertarian society. You have a limited and even distorted and perverted concept of liberty that is perfectly aligned with that of a conservative.

  9. I’d also like to add that your comments to Ian is rife with cheap strawmen – a common conservative tactic. You demonstrate your utter contempt for private property as well.

    I have to conclude that you are a conservative troll. Go back to FreeRepublic. If you really do consider yourself libertarian, you are still a conservative. Conservatives are so confused that they confused the word “Conservative” with the word “Confused”. Conservatives like you took it to an even higher level by leading yourself to beleive you are a libertarian.

  10. I do not believe convicted felons have the right to pack.

    OK Julian, let’s pretend for a minute you are really the dumb redneck you would like us to think you are, even though that’s bullshit.

    Convicted felons by whom for what? Most of the ones doing the convicting should be in the slammer first.

    I am a convicted felon (for bullshit) and have been in jail in seven states, again all bullshit. No pen.

    Some of the crimes my fellow jail residents were in for.

    Receiving of stolen property, for borrowing a car in good faith (not knowing it was stolen) to drive home. Got popped. More serious than stealing a car in Colorado.

    Oregon, fighting (assault) 11 years mandatory minimum. 17 year old Texas kid passing through Oregon defends himself in a fight against a crackhead robber. Robber goes to the authorities and reports it, knowing the system. Texas kid flees the sytem when confronted with the music. (cont)

  11. (cont)

    Teaxs kid gets poppped 5 yeas later and extradited to Oregon. Looking at 22 years now for fleeing and fighting the charge. If convicted he will be in his 40s when he gets out.

    I could go on and on, and on and on. Bottom line most “convicted felons” a lot of time, is 100 per cent bullshit.

    I don’t know if you’re for real or if Steve VanDyke made you up. If you are real I think you are probably pretty damn smart ’cause your kid is, and the apple doesn’t usually fall that far from the tree.

    Also, you said you were in college for several years, 30+ years ago, and standards were higher back then.

    You seem like you’d be the type to “paly dumb” to smoke out your opponent, or out of intellectual laziness, or both.

    Any fuckin’ way you look at it….

    Say you are a convicted felon caught up in gang enmity and you get out with a sincere conviction to change your ways.

    But the other side doesn’t see it that way. Protect yourself and go back or go die defenseless

  12. I obviously have just read a comment by another 13 percenter. Do you break all the laws are just the ones that are not to your liking? How do you choose which ones you will disregard? If you believe rape and torture is a way to get off, would you also break laws against that type of behaviour?

    No. As for law, the easy way to distinguish which ones are legitimate is who initiates coercion. Rape and torture are an initiation of coercion, even if the regime calls them legal, as in “the war on terror” and the wars abroad. Deciding what substances one puts in one’s own body is legal, unless the regime owns your body and mind (slavery). Such ridiculuous laws are actually “edicts,” not laws. Law understood correctly is defined by this principle – not whatever regime is in power.

    If you believe that whatever the regime in power calls “law” is in fact law, this leaves you no ground to stand on when the regime turns tyrannical, as it is doing. Obey a higher authority

  13. I just cannot believe how radical some of you can get in your belief systems. That is not libertarianism, that is anarchy and utter disregard for others rights and beliefs.

    “Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the face of tyranny is no virtue”. Anarchy and libertarianism, propeerly understood are one and the same. It is you who disregards others’ rights and beliefs because you believe you have the right to initiate coercion (force) against those who disagree with you. On the other hand, anarchists respect your rights and beliefs because we don’t do that; you are welcome to do and think whatever you want EXCEPT act on any initiation of coercion.

  14. It seems to me you would have more success working to change or eliminate the laws you believe are unjust than to just arbitrarily break them.

    Both are good. The more people break unjust edicts of an illegitimate regime, the less enforeable they become. At a certain point people feel free to break unjust edicts because they see everyone else getting away wih it. This is often times more practically achievable than working in the rigged political system to change these so-called laws.

    However, since it still leaves the door open for the regime to selectively enforce unjust “laws,” or use the threat of doing so to intimidate people, it may also be a good idea to also fight to get the regime to officially change its “laws” through the political system. If and when doing so, it is of the highest importance to avoid giving up principle and becoming just another regime lackey/powermonger. At first it is usually justified as being for the greater good, (cont)

  15. (cont) and then power itself through its addictive nature becomes the greater good.

    Usually this happens by stages but some people progress more rapidly than others. They may call it “realism” or “growing up” but the fact is it is really selling out.

    The prisons are full of people who believed laws did not apply to them. What good will you do anyone including yourself sitting in prison?

    Well, obviously, it’s to be avoided if possible, but not at the cost of turning society at large into a prison, which is over time what happens when the regime is allowed to get away with more and more – and it always tries to get away with more and more, because that is its nature.

    If worst comes to worst, prison can be a place to learn, teach and network. Time is what you make of it, to a large extent. The most effective prison bars are the ones in your own mind, whether you are in prison or out. See Brazil to understand what I mean here.

  16. You must be one of those anarchists disguised as a libertarian. Why don’t you just leave the libertarian movement and be what you are, an anarchist in the anarchist party and quit trying to hijack the Party.

    It’s you who are trying to hijack the movement and party, which were both founded on OUR principles. If there is an anarchist aprty, this is it. We did the heavy lifting of getting the LP on the ballot in many states and spreading the message. Anarchists are a lot more than 13% among the long-time and activist members. All LP members have signed an oath which, if analyzed logically, is anarchist. The rest are either commiting fraud, as Carl Milsted admits on Liberty For Sale, or have not fully analyzed what the oath means logically.

    Instead of coming into our party and trying to hijack it, why don’t you and the so-called reformers go start your own party? I hear the Reform Party is available, and it’s even still on the ballot in most states. (cont)

  17. Sorry, typo, a few states, not most states.

    There’s also the moderate party.

    http://www.modparty.net/

    Or start your own. Why do you have to hijack OUR party? Some of you undoubtably are regime agents and want to make sure no real opposition is allowed to exist. The rest are doing their bidding misguidedly.

  18. You are proof that we need the LRC more than ever so we can win elections instead of being bystanders critizing the two major parties.

    There’s a more fundamental value than winning elections, which is standing up for what’s right. If you win elections and your principles are wrong, it doesn’t matter if you call yourself a libertarian. In fact, it’s worse, because that is yet another political brand you will have then corrupted on behalf of the regime, like liberal (which used to mean libertarian).

  19. I can read the future on your comment so don’t even try to accuse me of being a NEOCON, a word I hate anyway because I have declared myself a libertarian in every way even though I disagree with the radical wing of the Party which you are obviously a member.

    You can also declare yourself to be Jesus or Napoleon. Doesn’t make it true. You’re not a libertarian in every way no matter what you declare. In what ways, exactly, do you disagree with conservatives and/or Republicans? Please be specific.

    I do not believe convicted felons have the right to pack.

    Why not? If someone violated an unjust law, why should it take away their natural rights? Even if they violated a just law, why should it take away their rights once they have done their time? If they are too dangerous to have guns, keep them in jail.

    If you are releasing people, they are going back to dangerous neighborhoods with gang enemies who still hate them even if they’re out. (cont)

  20. Self-protection is the right of any free person. A real criminal will pack regardless of whether it’s legal, so who can possibly be screwed over by making it illegal for ex-felons to pack?

    Only someone who is trying to be law-abiding. Instead the system is rigged so that someone who is trying to turn their life around and stay out of the system is tripped up and pushed back in. Crazy laws against self-protection are just one of many ways the system trips people up. This is because the system makes money out of arresting and jailing people and scaring people about crime. It benefits from having more people live under its thumb on probation or parole, or afraid of being arrested. The more people are intimidated in one way or another the better for the regime.

  21. Paulie Cannoli

    You suffer from “junkie justification” syndrome. You spend huge amounts of time trying to justify socially unacceptable behavior instead of changing the system or yourself. Convicted felons should not be allowed to back.

  22. Paulie Cannoli

    Are you not allowed to pack? I can and do. I have my permit in my wallet and make it a point to always be concealed armed just in case. I am a simple redneck from Georgia with a simple country education living in the Colorado mountains in a truly rural area.

    I spend most of my time finding the definitions to words used here and on the internet I have never seen or heard and have a terrible time with the use of “shortcut language” one finds on the internet to make a point. I believe it is really laziness or are commenters just trying to be “cool” by impressing themselves and others with their command of nonsensical words?

    Where is Shakespeare when we need him the most? He is now dead and buried along with his classics. Everyone does know who he is in history, right? Maybe not in today’s modern world of education.

  23. You suffer from “junkie justification” syndrome. You spend huge amounts of time trying to justify socially unacceptable behavior instead of changing the system or yourself.

    False, I am changing both the system and myself and trying to make regime initiation of coercion socially unacceptable.

    It is you who suffer from from “junkie justification” syndrome. You are addicted to the regime and justifying your former role in its military-industrial and prison-industrial complex as an enforcer. You’re also a junkie of the venom spewed by sensation-mongers, regime lackeys, sycophants and wannabe power mongers on hate radio.

    This book is a really good, very simple to read explanation of the phenomenon you suffer from. Unfortunately it delves into welfare socialism, but other than that part it is excellent and I highly recommend it.

    http://www.addictedtowar.com/

    Here’s a very easy explanation of the philosophy of liberty.

    http://isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

  24. Paulie Cannoli

    Are you not allowed to pack? I can and do.

    Allowed by whom? Who should I have to beg to have my natural right which I have by virtue of being a human being to defend myself?

    And more importantly, why?

    If someone has the right to decide who can and can’t be armed, and who has “permits” (a first step toward registration of actual guns, followed by confiscation, followed by concentration camps and genocide in numerous historical examples) it’s only a matter of time before they decide only THEY have that right.

    It will be done gradually so the frog doesn’t jump out of the water.

    Permits? We don’t need no stinkin’ permits. (Blazing Saddles)

    Do you have a permit to ask stupid questions? (Trace Adkins, Ruff And Ready).

  25. I am a simple redneck from Georgia with a simple country education living in the Colorado mountains in a truly rural area.

    Bullshit. Your attempts to hide your intellect behind a simple country redneck facade are transparent.

    I will not fall for your attempts to disarm us, either literally or in an argument. We’ll use all available firepower in either.

  26. Julian, this should be simple enough even for the dumb redneck you would like us to think you are.

    In what ways, exactly, do you disagree with conservatives and/or Republicans? Please be specific.

%d bloggers like this: