The Dagger - Local News with an Edge

You are here: Home / Sirens / Joppa Delivery Man Killed in Edgewood Robbery Attempt

Joppa Delivery Man Killed in Edgewood Robbery Attempt

By 84 Comments

From the Harford County Sheriff’s Office:

Detectives with the Harford County Sheriff’s Office are investigating their first homicide of 2019.

On Sunday, February 10, at approximately 8:30 p.m., Deputies assigned to the Southern Precinct of the Harford County Sheriff’s Office responded to the 700 block of Monticello Court in Edgewood for the report of a shooting.

Upon arrival, deputies located a 34-year-old male victim, suffering from a gunshot wound, on the ground outside the residences. Deputies immediately began life saving measures in an effort to save his life. Medics with the Joppa Magnolia Volunteer Fire Company responded and transported the victim, identified as Timothy Wayne Youngquist, of Joppa, to the University of Maryland Upper Chesapeake Medical Center where he was later pronounced deceased.

Three males were seen running from the crime scene. A thorough scan of the area utilizing K9 and Baltimore County Police Aviation was conducted, but no suspects were apprehended.

The investigation has been assumed by Detectives from the Harford County Sheriff’s Office Criminal Investigation Division. Preliminary information gathered indicates Youngquist was working in the area as a food delivery driver, when he was shot during what appears to be an attempted robbery.

Investigators from the Forensic Services Unit responded to the area to collect and preserve physical evidence in support of the investigation.

The investigation remains active and ongoing. There are no further details being released at this time. Anyone with information about this crime is asked to call Detective Donald Kramer at 410-409-3546.

Comments

  2. Edgewood is a pit. As a delivery driver I wouldn’t step foot anywhere in it without a team of people with me and there ought to be hazard pay. No delivery job is worth your life.

    • Gahler supports the right to carry. Who else among our elected leaders or other police chiefs can say the same? No rights for law abiding citizens and no rule of law or true punishment for criminals. All of Maryland will look like Baltimore soon enough with only one person willing to stand up and fight for us! Thanks for being a typical solve nothing and criticize a lot type of idiot Mr. Plantino. I will stick with my Sheriff!

  4. It seems like Edgewood has an awfully high crime rate. I venture to say that more law enforcement should be allocated to the area.

    In the interim, I feel that working as a delivery person anywhere should automatically convey a permit to (lawfully) carry a personal protection device of their choosing.

  6. This young man, the father of a newborn, was doing what he could to support his family. My condolences to his family and friends for the loss they have suffered. Thank you H says for posting the link to the GoFundMe for those that want to help and support.

    • I knew Tim fairly well. Nice guy. Sure didn’t deserve this. Just for the record, while some of the pictures showed him with Hunter as a newborn and a toddler, Hunter is actually about 5 years old right now. Time was devoted not only to his son, but his son’s mother whom he considered a soul mate.

  7. This story is truly horrible, but you are all missing the truth. The truth is you got 3 scumbags running around Edgewood that killed a DELIVERY DRIVER for food or whatever small amount of money he was carrying. When you decide to kill someone for such petty rewards, you really are a scumbag. You need to find these guys and get them off the street.

    • It depends on the circumstances. You are asking the question to a man who believes that sometimes homicide is justifiable. However, psychotic individuals whom prey on the innocent and kill for no reason other than pleasure, well, let’s just say there are times when the death penalty is justifiable. As I said before, it is dependent on the circumstances.

  9. Gahler, you talk a great talk…are you ready to stand with Glassman and allow Harford County Citizens to “Wear and Carry” and denounce our Rhino Governor and our over bearing Maryland Government with out-dated Maryland gun laws? We wait for your answer.

      • Gahler helped get rid of the State Police IBIS system, testified in support of self defense carry, testified in support of stopping the HQL, testified to get rid of portions of the FSA and spoke on many others! Can you tell me what Glassman has done on any second amendment legislation?

          • Talk about the right to carry… recently Del. Kathy Szeliga introduced Maryland House Bill 781( r Protection Act of 2019) which would allow parishioners to carry firearms in their churches to help protect from a mass shooting. She sponsored the same bill in the 2018 session and it went ‘nowhere’. Just what we need… our churches full of Pistol-Packing-Parishioners.

            The good news is that House Bill 781 will also go ‘nowhere’. Maryland is too smart for such stuff.

          • You know it is pretty easy to find information to support anyone’s position. This is especially possible for a person who doesn’t work and has an abundance of time on their hands to support any liberal cause from the safety of their parents home. Lol

          • Your know you are 100% correct…. it is very easy to collect “information” to support any position. The challenge is to collect facts. I wish our President had a better understanding of this. I like the following quote from Patrick Moynihan:

            “You are entitled to your own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts”

          • I actually read through the report attached to the article you shared. Interesting read… my favorite part, and I’ll paraphrase, ‘victims of crime are better off getting shot themselves than increasing the violence by shooting their assailant.’ That was precious. Honestly, that idea alone allowed me to dismiss whatever creative statistical gymnastics they pulled off.

            To apply the logic put forth in that study, to say a broader meaning… how is this? In our next armed conflict with an enemy, we send our military in unarmed, after all, there will be fewer casualties. Sounds pretty asinine, doesn’t it? Yes, I agree.

            Here is my challenge to you, Bob and Mike, and bring along your friends Pelosi and the nitwits who reason like she does… you have all these plans and designs to get firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, but I hear nothing about disarming known criminals. Why not?

            In the anti-Bill of Rights world law-abiding citizens are the problem, and criminals are mere victims. Victims because they steal firearms from law-abiding citizens to use in violent crimes. So the solution must be to infringe on the rights of people obeying the law!?! Seriously, you folks are stuck on stupid.

            Lastly, back to your report… you recognize if you read the report that the statistical analysis only determined crime rates – when subject to synthetic sorcery – increased, not that those crimes were necessarily committed by people carrying and using firearms legally. To make that leap they relied EXCLUSIVELY on anecdotal data. I’m not a statistician, but even I know this is lousy analysis.

            Tell you what, and I’ll make this easy… Our nation’s inner cities are ridden with crime. To the best of my knowledge they almost universally ban carrying firearms. Please provide the data-driven analysis that shows/demonstrates disarming people makes a population safer. If it’s common sense, so the gun-grabber crowd asserts, such statistics should be easily digested. One among your ranks dodged and deflected this request repeatedly. See if you can muster the strength to supply what should be fairly easy. Thanks. Oh yes, and that plan to disarm criminals as efficiently as infringing rights of non-criminals would also be much appreciated.

          • Show me where (ANYWHERE) it says a citizen has the right to carry a firearm in public.

            Tell me why the AR-15 can not be banned.

            All things Pro Gun people cannot do, thus, we have gun control that remains undisputed in the legislature and court decisions.

          • Hey NHD! Long time, how you been doing?

            Well, some good news for you… there is this document you’ve never read called the Constitution. See, now when it was adopted there was this group a bit nervous that individual liberties could be threatened by a strong central government. Since they just finished getting rid of one, there was a natural hesitancy to saddle themselves with a new one, but the advantages were evident. Anyhow, in one of those masterful compromises made during that time in our past there was promised that a Bill of Rights would be added. It would encompass the first first ten amendments named to this new written document. Remember, that document that you said could never be changed, but has somehow managed to do so 27 times? Yeah, that one…

            Okay… you see there is one of those amendments there, the 9th to be exact, that says something along this here… all rights not specifically delegated already are to be preserved to the people. Tricky, huh?

            Now, I can hear you already… ‘but no where does it say anything about carrying assault weapons!’ You’re right. It also says nothing about privacy, abortion, assumption of innocence and a host of other rights/freedoms that we are free to exercise.

            Honestly, child, would you please read the Constitution and learn something about it before you come on these boards again to prove to everyone you have never read it, don’t understand it, and seemingly doing nothing to rectify that problem.

            To your questions or statements or whatever you call them… carrying in public… okay covered that. Now, since I’ve schooled you again on our founding document… I’ll add, just because you can does not mean you should.

            Why can’t they (ARs) be banned? They can. So can straws. Heck let us toss in Mickey Mouse ears also. Anything can be banned. What is your point?

            Well, I’m pro gun and I did what you said I cannot do. I guess that makes you wrong on that one… and seemingly everything else concerning the Constitution so far in our discussions.

            Since I addressed your comments… please address mine. What is the plan to disarm criminals ahead of law abiding citizens? I’ve rather given up asking you to support your claim that disarming people and leaving criminals armed makes them safer, as you have claimed. I guess you and Trump share that quality… you both make claims not fully supported by facts.

            Have a great day… and come back for more, you make me smile.

        • I have no idea what the plan is for disarming criminals would be. I assume nothing will change from how most non-violent firearm crimes are discovered/processed through the judicial system.

          My point is every challenge on assault weapon bans has never been reversed and you keep rambling on about the US Constitution.

          What do I need to read in there that reverses all gun control?

          • You wrote: “I have no idea what the plan is for disarming criminals would be. ”

            Yet, you relish the idea of placing more restrictions on law abiding citizens. Really? No wonder I can’t take you seriously. Pathetic, honestly. Tell you what, think about it.. come up with something, even if it’s stupid.

            I don’t care about your claim that bans have not been overturned. I acknowledged that just because some things can be done doesn’t equate that they should. It’s a pointless line of thinking.

            It’s your outrageous claim that allowing criminals to be armed and disarming law abiding citizens makes us all safer is the one that just leave me shaking my head… still waiting for the evidence to support that claim.

            Lastly, you consider reading and understanding our founding document as mere rambling. I’m struggling to get past that one. Public officials take an oath to support and defend it, many have died to preserve it, and it is the one thing that allows you to remind us all publicly how foolish you speak and think. And you disrespect it enough to consider knowing it as rambling. On this, worse than pathetic. Do us all a favor and live in despotism for a while and then come back. I cannot believe you hate the United States that much, and seemingly have no problem declaring it here… wow.

          • We all know the US Constitution forbids the US government from disarming the American people. Yet that is what they have partially done and want to do more. The Maryland Constitution says the US Constitution is the SUPREME LAW, yet the State legislature ignores that law and implements gun control by creating statutes that they say is conforming with Federal statutes. When are you ALL going to realize that the Code of Rules and Regulations is the regulations of government, not the public. Unless you are a government employee, those regulations are nothing but a pipe dream. To top it off and make everything so insanely unconstitutional, they now make statutes that ONLY apply to the public and allow government employees to ignore that law. Look at the driving while talking on cell phones. Look at speeding and traffic laws. These are all laws that government employees DO NOT follow, yet they make us follow them to the max. When we realize that the government has created a system that allows our “public servants” to NOT be held accountable when they are the ones that are supposed to be held to a higher standard, we then realize that our government has become so corrupt and treasonous that the only remedy is to either reform this corrupt government or do away with it in full. YOU the government must follow your rules and regulations, but WE THE PEOPLE are NOT committing crimes unless there is a victim. The State can NOT be the victim. The Codes are so steeped in unconstitutional acts and reasoning that it has to be called TREASON because calling something unconstitutional is just a nice way of say it is an act of treason. When you test or “war” against the Constitution, you are a traitor. Period. End of discussion…..

          • “Can Spot Em”

            “I cannot believe you hate the United States that much, and seemingly have no problem declaring it here… wow.”

            Where did I type that? Now you’re just trolling.

            It’s unlikely gun hobbyist will change the political status quo in regards to firearm laws here in Maryland.

            You keep saying “disarming the law abiding people.”

            “Law abiding” people have until October 1st to review new passed legislation as it effects them and deal with whatever the issue is.

            After that if they are in non compliance they are now subject to it’s violations.

            It’s pretty simple, and constitutional.

          • Actually, yes you did… you may not have used those words, but it is certainly understood by anyone reading your post. It’s pretty simple, and obvious.

            I’m not trolling you… simply answering every challenge you’ve made, corrected every mistake you typed, and pointed out repeatedly everything you misunderstand.

            Like I told you in the very beginning… quit while you are behind.

          • Non compliance to whom? The rules and regulations are NOT law. They are the prima facia evidence of law and if the statute is NOT within the confines of the Constitution, then that same statute is null and void. The statute may even still appear on the books, but it doesn’t make it Constitutional and all whom eventually learn of the fraud and treason MUST be vindicated. Any statute that seeks to regulate behavior by the Federal government or on behalf of the Federal government is a FRAUD. Any statute made by the legislature to enforce on any member of the public is FRAUD and TREASON because you MUST have the consent of the people for that statute to be in effect. Locking a person up and throwing them in jail until they plea out is not a lawful grant of consent. It is coercion and terrorism. When we really think about it, the only people who need to account for their actions are those whom are committing fraud and treason against the very people who pay their salaries.

            “It is also important to note that when legislators write law for We the People without their consent; they war against God and the People. The United States Supreme Court defines statutes as: “An act of the legislature declaring, commanding, or prohibiting something; a particular law enacted and established by the will of the legislative department of government; the written will of the legislature, solemnly expressed according to the forms necessary to constitute it the law of the state.” Federal Trust Co. v. East Hartford Fire Dist., C.C.A.Conn., 283 F. 95, 98; In re Van TasselFs Will, 119 Misc. 478, 196 N.Y.S. 491, 494; Washington v. Dowling, 92 Fla. 601, 109 So. 588, 591. But the fact of the matter is that the will of the legislators is restricted by the will of the People (Constitution) just like the will of the People is restricted by the will of God”.

          • “The United States Supreme Court said: “The common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are “not the law”. – Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261. “There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman without his consent.” – Cruden v. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. We the People consent to legislated law only as we defined it in the Constitution for the United States of America. As Thomas Jefferson put it, “we bound government down by the chains of the Constitution”. We the People defined that Law in the Constitution Article VI as: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” Simply put We the People are bound and judged under the Common Law and statures where we have given our consent and government is bound and judged under the Constitution that We the People ordained”.

          • THE SOLUTION – “The United States Supreme Court gave us half of the solution to our problem when they said: “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment… In legal contemplation, it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed… Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it… A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, (the Constitution) it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” Bonnett v. Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908); NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)”.

          • “Actually, yes you did… you may not have used those words, but it is certainly understood by anyone reading your post. It’s pretty simple, and obvious.”

            Nope. You’re wrong. Nobody else has replied in favor of less gun control here.

            I’m a huge supporter of gun control and am glad to see Maryland has a top priority of it.

            I’m not even sure why you’re replying to me, you should take your “pro gun” arguments to Annapolis during the hearings.

            I think you know your personal opinion on the second amendment politics is not favorable.

            Good luck, I’ll be smiling when the next round of gun control gets passed.

          • You are finally right about something… I don’t know why I’m replying to you.

            For the record… I have not yet once advocated removing any existing gun control we already have. I’ve also never advocated anything other than revising existing laws to bring them closer in alignment to the intent of the 2A. I’ve advocated vigorously not to infringe any more than already has been done. I guess I typed everything too fast. Apologies. I’ll slow it down for you.

            So…. deflection, avoidance and projection… pretty much sums up Democratic arguing.

            You should smile. Because I can’t stop. You can offer nothing about disarming criminals unless they commit another crime… another victim… nice.

            My point addressing you is simple, really… to expose your idiocy. You put it on display and then don’t expect to get confronted… your tireless tactics are things of comedy. And that, is why I can’t take you seriously. Right now I’m trying to decide if you’re 13 on your parents’ computer or 31 living in their basement. Either way, it’s one of them. And if not, well, that’s what you sound like… enjoy your day.

            And, yes, next time I spot you spreading a false narrative or attacking the Constitution, or defending criminals I’ll be back. See ya.

          • Most gun owners would gladly turn in their guns versus being arrested.

            The gun owner majority is male, family men with too much they wouldn’t want to lose over an arrest. Their job careers could end over an arrest, wife might divorce them, have to sell the house to pay for legal resources, the list goes on and on.

  11. I’m looking forward to Gun control legislation being passed this year in Maryland .

    I’m not sure why this state took so long on regulating all firearms the way handguns have been, but I eagerly watch the progression of the proposed “Long gun Qualification License” and various other bans being introduced this session.

    I did see some “pro second amendment” bills but I doubt they will get very far. I don’t believe it’s a right to carry a firearm on your person in public, and evidently so does our majority elected state legislature.

    I for one do not want to be caught in the crossfire after two angry gun nuts go mental while I pump gas.

  12. Yawn.

    I never understand gun owners. They talk about the US Constitution for god given rights ( I agree )

    Then they have great anger towards people who want to impose gun control and talk about how criminals still have illegal guns.

    Yeah, if you’re a gun owner in a state and you chose not to obey your states law… here is a News Flash: You’re a criminal.

    Please enlighten me how states like California, New Jersey, New York, Maryland pass gun control and how it’s some national emergency that everyone who voted for these laws are infringing on everyone’s constitutional rights.

    Uh?

    • Wrong. The Code of Rules and Regulations is the law of government employees. The Codes have been fraudulently enforced on citizens whom are NOT beholden to them. There is only the law of common and statutes that have been consented upon by the people, not the government. You are NOT beholden to any statute your State’s treasonous legislature has passed unless the statute passes the Constitutional muster of the US and whichever State’s Constitution. As a general rule ALL statutes are unconstitutional because they are enforced without due process. Due process is never offered by any agency of the government because your government is NOT a government anymore. Your government is a mere mafia and has no authority but the gun and the bullet. Governance thru the use of the gun and bullet is TERRORISM. It also signifies the overthrow of the Constitutional Republic and it forfeits taxation and every other power and authority gifted to the government by the people. If you can’t understand this it is because you are a traitor too and you probably deserve the full penalty of Article 3 Section 3 that was set by the Second Continental Congress. There is NO LAW in codified statute unless that statute conforms to the Constitution. That’s the bottom line….

        • If the statutes are unconstitutional then they are NULL and VOID when enforced on the people. At that point the statute becomes a law to those whom are elected officials and government employees. If the statutes are still enforced on the people the enforcement becomes an act of fraud and treason. I don’t know why you have difficulty understanding this. The government must be constrained by the chains of the Constitution or that government becomes an abomination. You keep believing in the statutes and you will become a slave to those whom you have elected. That is what they want….

          • Good luck trying to convince the gun owner crowd with that sovereign citizen type speech.

            Most gun owners would gladly turn in their guns versus being arrested.

            The gun owner majority is male, family men with too much they wouldn’t want to lose over an arrest. Their job careers could end over an arrest, wife might divorce them, have to sell the house to pay for legal resources, the list goes on and on.

          • There is nothing “sovereign citizen” about what I typed. It is the REAL law, not the law you recognize. Stating your rights is NOT an act of being a sovereign citizen because those rights are part of the law. Statutes are NOT law. I know this is hard for you to comprehend and it is because you do not understand the law. You have been brainwashed into thinking the Constitution has been abrogated and the Codes are the law. I’m sorry they have tricked you into thinking this….

          • @Their hear – Maybe this will help you. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling on something being unconstitutional, yet a State passes a statute that seems to make that same unconstitutional act legal by statute, does that make really make the act legal and only unconstitutional? Think about it before you type. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and “every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding”. Does my quoting passages of the Constitution make me a “sovereign citizen” or does it make me a citizen educated in the law? Is a person educated in the law a “domestic terrorist” or are they really a proper citizen? Does conflicts between the Constitution and codified statutes make those who claim a statute unconstitutional a “sovereign citizen”? Think very carefully before you type. I am eagerly waiting to hear this….

          • Most gun owners would gladly turn in their guns versus being arrested.

            The gun owner majority is male, family men with too much they wouldn’t want to lose over an arrest. Their job careers could end over an arrest, wife might divorce them, have to sell the house to pay for legal resources, the list goes on and on.

          • Obviously, you have no intent on answering any common sense questions and just want to keep repeating the same phrase over and over that really doesn’t answer a damn thing. This State already has gun control and most of it is useless and pointless. We have issues in Maryland with handguns, not “assault weapons”. Hell, I don’t even know why we call them “assault weapons” when its really about banning versions of a semi-automatic AR15 that a lot of people are scared of because the gun looks intimidating. I’ve got news for you dipshits, you should be more scared of a weatherby 300 magnum than an AR15. That weatherby might not hold a lot of rounds, but it’ll go thru Kevlar like a knife thru butter and will literally blow your head off. No joke. You get hit in the head with a weatherby 300 magnum and your head will probably come right off. That’s a weapon. You can all go ahead and demonize a gun that is NOT a military rifle but you don’t have anything to say about a rifle that will turn a Swat team into ghosts. You guys got some serious issues. It’s NOT the guns, it’s the people wielding them, followed by high capacity magazines and the caliber of the ammunition. However, you will never know any better because once again we got this education issue. If you stupid fuktard Democrats would just get you heads out of each others butts for a few seconds, maybe, just maybe, you might pass some legislation that actually makes some sense. Imagine that, a Democrat actually making sense! I know it sounds incredible, but making sense goes a long way with people that actually have a brain in their heads….

  13. Irrespective of its use by a good guy to protect & defend or a bad guy to rob & commit mayhem, a gun is just a tool that delivers a projectile designed to kill, The bottom line is the fewer guns there are and the more restrictive the laws controlling their ownership & use, the SAFER we are.

    • Maybe. However, I am against any legislation that is designed to leave the public defenseless in their own homes. I am whole heartedly for gun rights to protect the sanctity of the home and that even goes to allowing non violent felons gun ownership to defend their homes. I’ll go along with having gun restrictions on the right to carry in public, especially in urban settings, but when we decide to leave a person and/or their families defenseless in their own homes, I can not agree. I believe the State of Maryland and the United States of America have already over stepped their authorities and have betrayed the Constitution to the point of no return. Either this government that you fools created reforms itself to be Constitutional or this government needs to go. If we keep going down the path that this treasonous government is following, there will be some VERY bad times ahead and I don’t want war in my country. We should be able to work this out, however you can’t discuss this kind of thing without clueless people coming out of the woodwork.

        • Tighter regulations for guns is the way to go.

          Every gun owner I know has told me they will turn their guns in if tighter gun control prevents them from legally further possessing them.

          They say stuff like I got a family to feed, Ill still have a pump shotgun it’s not that bad that some guns are banned

          • I agree. Tighter regulation is a step in the right direction. I don’t want to ban “all” guns.. I just think that gun ownership and usage needs to better regulated and controlled.

          • Of course they will SAY that to you. Obviously you aren’t very familiar with the first two rules of noncompliance club.

Leave a Reply to Well Well Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Archives

Sign up for The Daily Dagger Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to The Daily Dagger and receive new articles by email.