AUSTIN (KXAN) – A Travis County man faces charges after police say he shot a man who was trying to leave the scene of a fender bender near the Austin Bergstrom International Airport.
Charlies Dunbar, 73, is charged with aggravated assault after he allegedly shot 34-year-old Stacy Stautzenburger in the neck on Nov. 22, 2010. Stautzenburger was treated at a nearby hospital and released. Police reports did not say what time of day the shooting happened.
The shooting started with a minor fender bender on Texas 71 Eastbound. Dunbar holds a concealed-carry license, has no criminal record, and told police he was afraid Stautzenburger was going to run over him. He said he brings the .32 Beretta Tomcat with him for protection when he goes to Austin.
Full story here. Another write-up here.
First order of business: this is not a reason to pull your gun, nor a reason to use it. The gun is only pulled out when you feel your life (or the life of another) is in imminent danger. It’s not used to hold someone at bay.
But was the man’s life in danger? That’s hard to tell from the police report.
Apparently Stautzenburger didn’t have his license or insurance paperwork on him. Around here that typically means the person is driving illegally. And the fact Stautzenburger didn’t want police involved? That’s a possible tip-off the person is illegally in this country. So, “the fact that Stautzenburger had no ID on him made Dunbar ‘nervous,’according to the police report” and I can’t blame him for feeling that way.
But after that, the timing of events is odd. One thing says that Stautzenburger then went to his car and got in. Dunbar told him not to move. Stautzenburger started his car, then apparently Dunbar pulled his gun. Apparently Dunbar felt that the Stautzenburger was going to run him over, but during the reenactment to police it didn’t jive… he couldn’t have been run over.
At the hospital, Stautzenburger told police he wasn’t intending to flee the scene, but was trying to leave because Dunbar had pulled a gun on him and he was afraid of him. He told police he had “no intention of running Charles over with his vehicle,” the affidavit reads.
But if that’s the case, then why did he get into his car and start his car? Stautzenburger says he was trying to leave because the gun was pulled, but then why did you get into and start up the car?
Events don’t jive.
Furthermore:
“Charles said that he pulled the trigger in order to stop him, but was not intending to kill him.”
Folks, if you pull a gun you are using deadly force. Even if you didn’t intend to kill him, you very well could have.
Chances are good things aren’t going to go well for Dunbar. And it’s unfortunate it makes the rest of us CHL holders look bad. Stastistically it doesn’t amount to much (there’s always a bad apple in the bunch). I mean, that’s one bad CHL holder while the hundreds of thousands of other CHL holders didn’t do anything…. but us well-behaved folks don’t make the evening news.
So what can we learn from this:
- You don’t pull your gun unless your life (or the life of another) is truly in danger. It’s that “maximize beer and TV time” maxim.
- You say as little as possible during and after the event. The events are likely to be fuzzy in your brain and you’ll be pumped with adrenaline and emotion. You may not remember things correctly, and it can only serve to work against you. The facts will be what they will be and cannot be denied, but you don’t need to remember the facts in a skewed way. They won’t change in 48-72 hours, so use your lawyer and speak through them to ensure the facts are straight. I mean, supposing Dunbar remembered the “reenactment” incorrectly, if he wants to correct his story, the changing of the story won’t look good.
- You take your CHL class from a good instructor, pay attention, and heed what’s taught there… especially the parts about non-violent dispute resolution.
