Armstrong County man accused of firing up to 11 shots at couple |
Valley News Dispatch

Armstrong County man accused of firing up to 11 shots at couple

Chuck Biedka

Bullets “ricocheted and sparked off the pavement” when an Armstrong County man fired up to 11 shots at a couple after he argued with them Wednesday night, but no one was hurt, according to state police.

Anthony Kyle Long, 30, of East Franklin, faces nine charges in connection with the incident, including aggravated assault, reckless endangerment and public drunkenness, court records show.

State police said Long argued with a 34-year-old man and 31-year-old woman near his Miner Street home around 11 p.m. The alleged victims told troopers Long got a handgun from inside his residence and fired five to 10 shots at the street in their direction, according to a criminal complaint.

The couple fled in an SUV and Long fired at least one more shot that struck the vehicle’s bumper, the complaint said.

Police later found Long hiding in his backyard; he surrendered to police without further incident.

Things were tense at first because responding officers didn’t know that, by then, Long had given the 9 mm pistol to a relative and he was unarmed, Trooper Anthony Vaccaro said.

Long was arraigned early Thursday and taken to Armstrong County Jail in Kittanning after failing to post $25,000 bond, records showed.

Chuck Biedka is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chuck at 724-226-4711, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.