First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply Armed neighbor rushes to aid a mother and daughter being brutally attacked
11505 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

Ryulightorb wrote:


marinewrestler wrote:

only problem is that the neighbor had 15 rounds and could only get one of them and it was non fatal sounds to me like he needs to get back to the range and work on his aim a little


Non fatal and stopped the attack.

I say that's a better result then fatal and stopping the attack.

Those guys deserve to suffer but death is letting them off easy


No, but that's the problem with guns or weapons. People end up justifying killing someone (who is fleeing from a crime) as doing the right thing. It's different if the mom had the gun and shot back at them in self-defense... but the neighbor was the first to open fire when he saw them already fleeing. Why is it okay if it was a fatal shot? They should be judged by the courts and legal system rather than someone's smoking gun.

Like, this guy from an MMO told me there's little crime in his town because if thieves try to steal, they just shoot at them. Really? So if someone's trying to steal, it's okay to take their life? Just one of the reasons why I'm against guns being legal. It's like we're becoming barbaric again, and extreme.
Posted 5/31/16
15 rounds (14 of which went who knows where), one hit against fleeing suspects....
1807 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16
I saw this on the news, the neighbor got arrested for helping and stopping a crime in progress. Hoping this guy has his charges dropped for being a good citizen and neighbor.
Posted 5/31/16 , edited 5/31/16

Solefyre wrote:

I saw this on the news, the neighbor got arrested for helping and stopping a crime in progress. Hoping this guy has his charges dropped for being a good citizen and neighbor.


Stop it? He shot at them while they were running away. He should be charged.
I could see it if had got in the house and stopped them mid attack, but shooting at them while fleeing is idiotic and reckless.
1807 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

nooneinparticular wrote:


Solefyre wrote:

I saw this on the news, the neighbor got arrested for helping and stopping a crime in progress. Hoping this guy has his charges dropped for being a good citizen and neighbor.


Stop it? He shot at them while they were running away. He should be charged.


While running away, what direction were they running? If it was towards him then it was a justified shooting, if it was away from him then it wasn't because there are very few situations that allow you to shoot someone in the back and be justified. I'll assume the neighbor heard the gun shots, so after hearing this if the guys ran out of the apartment and towards him you can claim that you are fearing for your life. Additionally most states that allow carry have Good Samaritan laws that protect people who are helping others.

Although this was in what New York or Chicago, one of the big cities, and I am not familiar with their gun laws.
51321 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16
Did that guy let a 3rd grader scribble on him with a marker or did he seriously get someone to give him tattoos like that?

Good thing they were caught and there were no casualties.
186 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

lambofgenesis wrote:
No, but that's the problem with guns or weapons. People end up justifying killing someone (who is fleeing from a crime) as doing the right thing. It's different if the mom had the gun and shot back at them in self-defense... but the neighbor was the first to open fire when he saw them already fleeing. Why is it okay if it was a fatal shot? They should be judged by the courts and legal system rather than someone's smoking gun.


You say that like someone who breaks into people's homes, robs them, hurts them, threatens to rape them .... likely traumatizes them for life... You say that like such a person actually deserves to live.
They don't.
Nevermind that they commited crimes before, and absolutely will commit more in the future if they are let out of jail.
Nevermind that even if they stay in jail, they will be costing hard working honest citizens tax dollars, and basically living off society pretty comfortably.
These are not people stealing food to survive. These are violent criminals robbing, hurting, and raping honest people.
Fuck yes they deserve to be shot.


lambofgenesis wrote:
Like, this guy from an MMO told me there's little crime in his town because if thieves try to steal, they just shoot at them. Really? So if someone's trying to steal, it's okay to take their life? Just one of the reasons why I'm against guns being legal. It's like we're becoming barbaric again, and extreme.


The people who are barbaric are the criminals committing these crimes, not the citizens who want to protect their safety and peaceful way of life.

The day one of those animals hurts or kills a family member of yours, I wonder if you'll still have the same views.
11505 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

X41822N wrote:


lambofgenesis wrote:
No, but that's the problem with guns or weapons. People end up justifying killing someone (who is fleeing from a crime) as doing the right thing. It's different if the mom had the gun and shot back at them in self-defense... but the neighbor was the first to open fire when he saw them already fleeing. Why is it okay if it was a fatal shot? They should be judged by the courts and legal system rather than someone's smoking gun.


You say that like someone who breaks into people's homes, robs them, hurts them, threatens to rape them .... likely traumatizes them for life... You say that like such a person actually deserves to live.
They don't.
Nevermind that they commited crimes before, and absolutely will commit more in the future if they are let out of jail.
Nevermind that even if they stay in jail, they will be costing hard working honest citizens tax dollars, and basically living off society pretty comfortably.
These are not people stealing food to survive. These are violent criminals robbing, hurting, and raping honest people.
Fuck yes they deserve to be shot.


lambofgenesis wrote:
Like, this guy from an MMO told me there's little crime in his town because if thieves try to steal, they just shoot at them. Really? So if someone's trying to steal, it's okay to take their life? Just one of the reasons why I'm against guns being legal. It's like we're becoming barbaric again, and extreme.


The people who are barbaric are the criminals committing these crimes, not the citizens who want to protect their safety and peaceful way of life.

The day one of those animals hurts or kills a family member of yours, I wonder if you'll still have the same views.


Yeah man. You're exactly why I don't want guns to be legal anymore. Geez with that logic let's go shoot every thief. Who cares about due process, amirite?

Obviously if someone breaks into your house posing harm while trying to rob you, yes you can shoot them, but wow -- if you can aim for both their legs to stop them, why go for the headshot?
1807 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

lambofgenesis
Obviously if someone breaks into your house posing harm while trying to rob you, yes you can shoot them, but wow -- if you can aim for both their legs to stop them, why go for the headshot?


Well on this the only legally justifiable reason to shoot someone is to STOP them. It is illegal to shoot someone to kill them, this is murder. It is illegal to shoot someone to wound or harm them, don't remember what this was called. When you use a gun for protection you are doing so to stop that person from harming yourself or another individual. In carry classes you are taught to shoot for center mass because it is the biggest target and gives the least change of missing and injuring a bystander. Now because of our legal system they also throw in the saying dead men tale no tales, because if you shoot someone, even justifiably, and they live, they will press charges against you and have a better chance of "proving" that you were not justified in your self defense.

On your other point, no you don't shoot someone who is robbing your house and running away with your tv. That's why we have home owners/renters insurance. Now you come home and they are in your house actively, you can ask them to leave with your gun in hand, nut you can't shoot them.

Honestly being a responsible gun owner means knowing you local legislation for gun laws, when you are legally allowed to utilize a firearm, and ACTIVELY AVOIDING DANGER. In 99% of cases, there is the option to just run away or ignore the situation; however, you know fight or flight response makes it hard to think rationally.
31141 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 5/31/16

lambofgenesis wrote:

No, but that's the problem with guns or weapons. People end up justifying killing someone (who is fleeing from a crime) as doing the right thing. It's different if the mom had the gun and shot back at them in self-defense... but the neighbor was the first to open fire when he saw them already fleeing. Why is it okay if it was a fatal shot? They should be judged by the courts and legal system rather than someone's smoking gun.

Like, this guy from an MMO told me there's little crime in his town because if thieves try to steal, they just shoot at them. Really? So if someone's trying to steal, it's okay to take their life? Just one of the reasons why I'm against guns being legal. It's like we're becoming barbaric again, and extreme.

The justification for shooting a fleeing suspect is typically that you're doing so to protect the community at large:

The neighbor knew (or at least strongly suspected, due to hearing screaming and gunfire) that the suspects were armed and, while they were fleeing the scene, he/she had no way of knowing what their next course of action would be - perhaps they'd steal a car by murdering the driver. Perhaps they'd run headfirst into a group of nuns or schoolchildren and fire at them in a panic due to their agitated state.

In short, the neighbor knew they had guns, had been firing them at women/children and were about to escape into the community at large where they may continue to inflict harm. A reasonable person (I'm referring to the legal concept) would consider the use of potentially lethal force to stop them as justified when considering the potential danger to the community they posed and the short window of opportunity in which intervention was possible.

If they had not had reasonable cause to believe the suspects were "armed and dangerous", the neighbor would have had less legal justification for firing on them as they fled.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.