home owner shoots and kills home burglar should he be prosecuted? (drug, accuse)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it can be safely said he was in fear of his life. I'd assume someone entering my home is there to rob me not just steal and definite danger to me and my family. In Texas it would be covered under the castle statue in law.
It's not usually what happens. A theif is just after materialistic things they can either sell for money or keep cause they can't buy it themselves. Most theives are not looking to hurt a person. They want to get their product and get out. This is why most home invasions happen during the day, when people are at work or out. This crime does not warrant death. Yes, I've been robbed before. It sucks, but I did not wish death to my intruder. I wished him a lifetime of bad karma, but not death.
I find it distrurbing that so many people DO think stealing and/or damaging property deserves not only the death penalty, but that that penalty should be dealt out by an average citizen with little or no accountability. Seriously effed up to me.
I agree that stealing does not warrant death, inflicted by an average citizen or anyone else. But that is not the issue.
The issue is whether a home owner should be required to assume all of the risk involved in a home invasion. You're suggesting that the home owner should wait to determine the trespassers' intention or whether they are armed before acting? If an individual makes the choice to break the law and put others at risk it is that person who should bear the risk that his action may result in injury -- not the poor s.o.b. who wakes up terrified in the middle of the night fearing for his and his family's life.
Shoot him in the limb? You obviously have never fired a firearm in your life, much less shot at a moving target, in a darkened house, while under stress. This is not the first time that I've heard people suggest such things -- usually its a cop who should have shot the knife or gun out of a criminal's hands. Understand that what you are suggesting is not realistic, and no one who is placed in fear for his life just so that some thug can take his stuff should have to take such chances. That is not just or fair either.
It is up to you whether you want to own and learn to use a firearm -- that is a personal choice. Fortunately, it is not up to you, or to anyone else, whether I choose to defend myself and my family from people who would view us as nothing more than a source of free supplies.
Most theives are not looking to hurt a person. They want to get their product and get out.
No, they want to get someone else's product and get out. Only a thief (or a fence) would talk that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennies4Penny
I find it distrurbing that so many people DO think stealing and/or damaging property deserves not only the death penalty, but that that penalty should be dealt out by an average citizen with little or no accountability.
There is tons of accountability (criminal charges and civil suits), but we'll gloss over that for now. I take it from your response that you oppose killing a thief because the punishment doesn't fit the crime?
How about sending a message to criminals that if they want to break into a home, they might....I dunno...lose their life? Why not have a criminal wonder if his life is worth stealing a TV??
Instead prosecuting the homeowner sends a message to the criminals that if they break into the home, the home owner might be too afraid to risk prosecution so they will go along with what the criminal demands.
If you don't want to die...don't break into someone's house
two things will happen if someone breaks in my house, regardless of whether he is trying to steal something or cause me or my family bodily harm
1. I grab my legally registered to me gun
2. I shoot him dead
there is no rationalization or anything else that needs to occur; I feared for my life and the life of my family, and I protected them from bodily harm
based on the high level of criminal activity in the usa now a days, you'd be hard pressed to find a jury to convict you of anything if that ever happened to you
I knew the gun huggers would dislike my post. But, nope I still don't think a PERSON should die just because they are trying to steal things. Trying to physically harm you, yes protect yourself. And if you are as handy with your weapon as you all claim to be, you should be able to properly assess the situation before you start firing off a bunch of rounds.
Why should the person be prosecuted? Because there are too many factors to say that anyone gets to shoot whoever they want just because they are inside their house. That is a dangerous route to take. Also, that person you killed has a family and they deserve closure. That person could be a lifelong criminal or a teenager who is a first time offender. Where was the person shot? In the front or the back? Because if he is shot in the back, particularly near an exit or from far away, that means the intruder was trying to get away and of no threat to the homeowner. Do they really deserve to die for running away? No. Was the intruder armed? Did the intruder approach the homeowner? Those are grounds for protecting yourself so fire away.
If you put a gun to an intruder one of three things will happen. One, they will wait at gunpoint until the police arrives, two, they will try to run or three they will try to attack you. Only the third scenario requires an actual firing of your weapon and again if you are as good with your gun as you all claim to be, a shot to a limb should keep them at bay until the cops arrive.
This is not a black or white, yes or no situation. And we shouldn't continue to let people get away with murder under the guise of self-protection. You should have to PROVE you were in actual danger, that your life was truly threatened.
I wonder how you would feel if your teenager or other family member made a one time stupid mistake (perfect people raise your hands) and wound up dead because some trigger happy nut was "defending his/her property." You can teach your kids all you want, but when they are out with their friends and feel that group pressure, sometimes they get caught up in moment and make a bad decision. It happens. And they shouldn't die because of it.
Call me a gun hugger... and you're right, didn't like (or agree with) your post.
I am as handy as I state but make no mistake: someone breaks into my house there is NO 'Properly Assessing' going on - I'm blasting every round in my gun into to idiot that decided to break into my house... I won't reload - won't be a need - they'll be 'offed' before round 3 hits them... I'll call 9-1-1 to make them aware of the situation, and then call ServePro to have them come clean up the mess this idiot on the floor has created.
How would I feel if my teenager made such a mistake? I'd be very upset - upset that my 'you don't do these things' list wasn't abided by...
One cannot argue that an intruder takes their life in their hands when they break and enter into private property uninvited.
However, more often than not, the resident ends up wounded or dead by escalating the situation.
Much better to let the burglar go about his business, protect yourself and your family, and live another day.
Sure, it hurts in the short term, and yes, things can escalate if that is what the intruder has in mind, but your bringing a gun into the situation does nothing, usually, to defuse the situation.
It all sounds good....macho....hero....defender of "my" rights....until you have bullet hole in your heart.
Call it macho if you want. But that has nothing to do with the reality of the issue. Defending oneself and family is a personal responsibility.
The supreme court ruled back in 2005 that the police have no duty to protect the public.
Relying on them is risky at best, foolish at least. When seconds count, the police are just minutes away. Criminals have a known tendency not to proceed in the presence of police in actions like burglary and robbery. Once on the scene, the police will be glad to take some statements, make some sort of investigation, and possibly some day in the future, make an arrest, if it's convenient. From there, it may go to court and there might eventually be a conviction. Both of my brothers are cops. I've had many discussions with them on how it works. A lot of how well the investigation is conducted depends on how well connected the victim is to the local power brokers.
If you're comfortable with how that works, fine.
Leaving my family at the mercy of criminals is not my course of action. Intruders at my home will be met with force. Relying on the good intentions of home invaders doesn't play out well in many cases.
I knew the gun huggers would dislike my post. But, nope I still don't think a PERSON should die just because they are trying to steal things. Trying to physically harm you, yes protect yourself. And if you are as handy with your weapon as you all claim to be, you should be able to properly assess the situation before you start firing off a bunch of rounds.
Why should the person be prosecuted? Because there are too many factors to say that anyone gets to shoot whoever they want just because they are inside their house. That is a dangerous route to take. Also, that person you killed has a family and they deserve closure. That person could be a lifelong criminal or a teenager who is a first time offender. Where was the person shot? In the front or the back? Because if he is shot in the back, particularly near an exit or from far away, that means the intruder was trying to get away and of no threat to the homeowner. Do they really deserve to die for running away? No. Was the intruder armed? Did the intruder approach the homeowner? Those are grounds for protecting yourself so fire away.
If you put a gun to an intruder one of three things will happen. One, they will wait at gunpoint until the police arrives, two, they will try to run or three they will try to attack you. Only the third scenario requires an actual firing of your weapon and again if you are as good with your gun as you all claim to be, a shot to a limb should keep them at bay until the cops arrive.
This is not a black or white, yes or no situation. And we shouldn't continue to let people get away with murder under the guise of self-protection. You should have to PROVE you were in actual danger, that your life was truly threatened.
I wonder how you would feel if your teenager or other family member made a one time stupid mistake (perfect people raise your hands) and wound up dead because some trigger happy nut was "defending his/her property." You can teach your kids all you want, but when they are out with their friends and feel that group pressure, sometimes they get caught up in moment and make a bad decision. It happens. And they shouldn't die because of it.
How exactly do you inquire if the intruder is intent on harming you? "Hey there stranger, stop a minute and have some coffee while I ask you some questions. If you just want my TV, then you are free to take it and go. If you want to rape my wife, give me a minute to call the police so they can show up 20 minutes after you're done and gone."
The law states that if someone is in my house uninvited, I can legally kill them in defense of myself and my family. Period. I don't have to ask questions or give them a chance to run, or attempt to hold them at gunpoint for the police. If they are bold enough to break into my house, then for all I know they are intent to inflict harm. If they are actively running away then yes it is illegal to shoot them in the back. If they are attacking my family member and the only way I can safely neutralize them is to shoot them in the back, then I am legally justified.
I think they should be prosecuted. Unless the intruder was trying to physically harm the home owner and put them in danger, there is no need to shoot someone. People shoot too quickly these days and they always shoot to kill. No one should die for trying to steal a TV or jewelry or whatever. Go to jail, yes, but killed no.
You sound exactly like Larry King when he had a late night talk radio show in the late 70's
Larry said to a caller with a strong southern accent..........." If a burglar breaks into your house, you do not have the right to shoot him unless he enters your bedroom and threatens to harm you.
Is your TV worth taking another man's life " ?
Caller said.............." Larry, you should be asking the burglar if my TV is worth risking his life "
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
