Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:26 PM
 
4,911 posts, read 3,434,873 times
Reputation: 1257

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
What if he shot them each once and then just left them to bleed to death? No kill shots? Would he still be guilty of a crime?



You mean without calling somebody, like 911? Yes, it would be. Was somebody suggesting he should have just left them there?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
13,448 posts, read 15,508,787 times
Reputation: 19007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
I think I'll be the person that decides if I'm feeling threatened. Just because a person is on the ground does NOT mean they are no longer a threat.

I'm not saying that I would ever shoot someone in this situation. But I refuse to glorify the criminals that perpetrated the act. If you break into someone's home, you MIGHT get killed. Even at my most drunk or stupid, I can understand that concept.
On the ground, writhing from a gunshot wound on the floor... is a threat. Okay. Oh wait, he could grab your ankles and turn the tables like in the movies?


No one is glorifying the kids, but they went from being perps to victims the moment he made that decision that their lives were no longer needed on this Earth. That isn't for him to decide, period. You break into someone's home, yes they can shoot you. "Shoot you" means the initial fire..not striding up to the hapless person on the ground who is clearly in no position to do anything and firing a brain shot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:28 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,776,820 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
I think I'll be the person that decides if I'm feeling threatened. Just because a person is on the ground does NOT mean they are no longer a threat.
Yep.. You know those Bayonets Obama referred to? Ask solders what they use them for. Ask them why?

Victims my butt? They had no business in that house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:43 PM
 
1,742 posts, read 3,119,756 times
Reputation: 1943
When you break into someones house you better expect ANYTHING. If you don't, expect any consequence.
Probably saved the taxpayers a $ million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:49 PM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,581,762 times
Reputation: 24780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
Do you think the little thugs were bringing the old man Christmas tea and cookies?

Or maybe you think the old man should have offered the little thugs Christmas wishes and Santa Claus cupcakes?

They got exactly what they deserved. The old man deserves accolades.
Sure hope you don't have a concealed carry permit.


Quote:
What? You think the little thugs went into the old man's house just to look at his property?

It doesn't take a very high IQ to know they were going to TAKE his property. Hence: LOSS of property. Maybe you think he should have waited until they had his property and were leaving the premises. Then he could have shot them in the back as they were fleeing!

You can't have it both ways.

Good God. It really is rocket science for some folks.
You're angry. I can tell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:51 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,776,820 times
Reputation: 13868
lol, so now Liberals think it's ok for people to break into houses?

Soldiers knew the enemy plays dead and as they walk past them the enemy shoots so they are trained to ram the bayonet into the bodies as they walk by. They look dead but hey lets make sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 01:51 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,216,585 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
You still haven't explained how it's justifiable to murder an intruder well after they have been incapacitated and pose no threat. Your position on this is immoral and illegal.

cops do it all the time and get away with it.

the man was in fear for his life and the criminals got their asses shot off. the elderly man should be let out of jail with no charges at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Area 51.5
13,887 posts, read 13,690,317 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
This sounds like the use of excessive force to stop the crime as well as murder for avenging the attempted robbery. As far as I know you are morally, if not legally, as this is not military combat, required to warn the intruder that you are armed and they must stop or you will shoot. If they stop and put their hands in the air you do NOT shoot. If they reach for a weapon you have the right to drop them right there. In any case you do not keep your victims around for a day or so after.

This guy is in really deep s**t with the law. That is the way it should be.
lol.

I'd love to see you when someone breaks into your domain. I can picture it, and it's a regular little comedy.

"Over here! Don't hurt me. I've got a gun, I really do! And I'll use it, too! This is your warning!"

And while you're standing there like a mental midget waiting for them to stick their hands in the air, they wipe your face off your neck.

Oh, Lordy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago View Post
Lets keep on the rails, and don't drive into the field


The man laid in wait
Yes, let's do stay on the rails. And please explain how one 'lays in wait' in his own home.

Talk about off the rails!

Last edited by Dale Cooper; 11-27-2012 at 02:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 02:43 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,965,265 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
This sounds like the use of excessive force to stop the crime as well as murder for avenging the attempted robbery. As far as I know you are morally, if not legally, as this is not military combat, required to warn the intruder that you are armed and they must stop or you will shoot. If they stop and put their hands in the air you do NOT shoot. If they reach for a weapon you have the right to drop them right there. In any case you do not keep your victims around for a day or so after.

This guy is in really deep s**t with the law. That is the way it should be.

No GregW, this depends on state. You are NOT required to warn someone of such when they are committing a crime as described in most Castle Law states. That is what law enforcement and military (under non-war conditions) are required to do. You are not required to do such as you are under no oath to place yourself in further danger during a crime.

The guy is in "trouble" because he executed them (as it appears by the story) when there was no threat to his life or property. That is why he is in trouble.

A victim is not required to consider the safety of their attacker as such an action can endanger them. A verbal warning in a lawful defense circumstance (ie they are breaking into a home) directly endangers the victim as they have informed the attacker of the situation. It is assumed by most state laws that a person committing such a crime is knows that such is unlawful and contains certain consequences to such an action.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2012, 02:46 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,965,265 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
lol.

I'd love to see you when someone breaks into your domain. I can picture it, and it's a regular little comedy.

"Over here! Don't hurt me. I've got a gun, I really do! And I'll use it, too! This is your warning!"

And while you're standing there like a mental midget waiting for them to stick their hands in the air, they wipe your face off your neck.

Oh, Lordy!

His comment was absurd in practicality, but don't laugh, some states have such stupid requirements. If you want to get a laugh, read the requirements of lethal force in California. It is just plain stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:18 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top