First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Post Reply AR15 stops Three baddies in home invasion
48322 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17
I like how every single news outlet reported the sons age as 23 except for FOX, such a simple thing to not screw up. To me the fact that one of the young men was found outside in the driveway indicates he either tried to escape when he heard the gunfire and was shot in the back or was able to get that far after being shot inside the home. Either way, I feel as though they didn't really have to die.
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

runec wrote:

That is some profound legal bullshit to charge the driver with three counts of first degree murder and yeah, the details here are a mess.

Uh, she drove 3 armed men to a residence and supposedly was the one to order them to rob it. They could've raped, tortured and murdered the occupants.
If you don't want to be held responsible for the bad shit that happens when you decide to do stuff like this, don't do it in the first place.




A number of the articles say the shooter actually talked to the burglars and some even say that both the shooter and his father were present. While others seem to say it was just the son who encountered them?

I imagine he probably yelled 'get the fuck out' and they refused or threatened and were shot. In all articles I've read it said both the father and son were home, and that the son reacted when he heard the back door being broken into.
Police said in their press conference that there was no connection between the suspects and the shooter.

Local outlets reported the son as 19 first, not just Fox btw.


he either tried to escape when he heard the gunfire and was shot in the back or was able to get that far after being shot inside the home

That's one hell of a reach
5.56 isn't a very big caliber as you've seen if you've read the thread. Considering the statements of the police, it is almost 100% he was shot in the front (possibly even caught the bullet after it went through his buddies) and then ran before dropping and bleeding to death. Kind of like a whitetail if you don't shoot it in the heart and drop it on the spot.
Edit: Even if he was shot in the back it would still be a clean shoot considering you can shoot someone if you've witnessed them committing a violent felony
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Lance_Clemings wrote:

And they deserve it too. Too bad I'm too broke for a gun, I would love to have a replica M1 carbine, or some other lightweight semi auto carbine for home defense purposes.


Stealing doesn't deserve death


The problem lies in that they are strangers, who are operating in the middle of the night, whose goals are unknown, and who have already broken into your house. They could be armed, they could be not, who knows? It is not about what they "deserve", but the response to a possible threat to one's family and to themselves. This is one of those "shoot first, ask questions later" that clearly outlined in laws as having limits, sure, but also leeway.

I agree with the law for the most part. If the circumstances known to the home owner can justify their belief that their life is in danger, they can shoot, versus going after a robber and shooting them in a back.

I think it is better to kill people before they can possibly kill you, when they are more than able to do you harm, and appear to have a sinister agenda. No one wants a repeat of the Harvey Family case.


Well I disagree with that law
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

tuzzy wrote:

Moral of Story ? ? Do Not break into Peoples Homes... Do Not Steal unless YOU are READY to ACCEPT the CONSEQUENCES of YOUR ACTIONS...JEEEZE ! Not to Hard to figure Out People..


Moral of the story. Americans don't give a shit about criminal lives :/
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

D4nc3Style wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Lance_Clemings wrote:

And they deserve it too. Too bad I'm too broke for a gun, I would love to have a replica M1 carbine, or some other lightweight semi auto carbine for home defense purposes.


Stealing doesn't deserve death


Someone breaks into your house, it's fair game.


Not really if they are unarmed it's wrong and should be illegal.
Typical American response though
5347 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

Ryulightorb wrote:

Not really if they are unarmed it's wrong and should be illegal.
Typical American response though



If someone breaks into my house I don't know if they're armed or not, I'm not gonna wait and find out.
Typical non-American response.
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

Ryulightorb wrote:
Not really if they are unarmed it's wrong and should be illegal.
Typical American response though


Why do you think fists and feet can't be weapons? And apparently that they can't arm themselves from your own kitchen drawer after you've let yourself get tied up and robbed?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/29/man-convicted-in-nanny-cam-new-jersey-home-invasion-beating-gets-life-term.html
The woman here could've easily died, and that's just from one violent burglar.
I don't care if you're 15 or 50, unarmed, weak or strong. You break into a home, any sane person on earth would consider you a deadly threat.
22927 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Online
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

Ryulightorb wrote:

Well I disagree with that law


I told you the reasoning of the law, and its limits. It is not a simple case of shooting anyone on your property. For example, a Detroit man was investigated when an inebriated women began knocking on his front door repeatedly and he shot through the door, killing her. He was sentenced to 17 years.

Whereas this case appears to have three intruders invade the home, one armed with a knife. It is so much that I do not think they have a right to "defend" their property as a right to defend themselves, since the motives of the intruders were unknown to the shooter at the time as well as their capabilities of the now dead. It is a scenario of "Better safe than sorry", as well as a mix of moral obligation to family than strangers who most of the time in these circumstances do mean some harm.

It is not some lives are worth less than others but the reaffirmation that we cannot expect people to be overly lenient and playing Russian Roulette with their family lives.

This is not a particular gun issue, but that of the issue of self defense. He could have used a bat or sledge hammer, and it would be the same debate.

I am not quite sure I understand your argument against what seems to be just self defense. Is it this case in particular? I think it deserves investigation.
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I told you the reasoning of the law, and its limits. It is not a simple case of shooting anyone on your property. For example, a Detroit man was investigated when an inebriated women began knocking on his front door repeatedly and he shot through the door, killing her. He was sentenced to 17 years.

Whereas this case appears to have three intruders invade the home, one armed with a knife. It is so much that I do not think they have a right to "defend" their property as a right to defend themselves, since the motives of the intruders were unknown to the shooter at the time as well as their capabilities of the now dead. It is a scenario of "Better safe than sorry", as well as a mix of moral obligation to family than strangers who most of the time in these circumstances do mean some harm.

It is not some lives are worth less than others but the reaffirmation that we cannot expect people to be overly lenient and playing Russian Roulette with their family lives.

This is not a particular gun issue, but that of the issue of self defense. He could have used a bat or sledge hammer, and it would be the same debate.

I am not quite sure I understand your argument against what seems to be just self defense. Is it this case in particular? I think it deserves investigation.



If they had weapons that's fine but if they didn't have weapons no one should have died unless they attacked that's the end of the story.
2443 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

D4nc3Style wrote:

If someone breaks into my house I don't know if they're armed or not, I'm not gonna wait and find out.
Typical non-American response.




it's easy for one to pretend to be a pacifist and know exactly what to do in all kind of situations - while having little or no knowledge/experience what so ever (especially on the net) .. it's the era of the keyboard warriors after all..

if you know for sure which specific houses you can rob without getting shot.. I'm sure the criminals will love that and they will be visiting those particular houses more often



29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17

Amyas_Leigh wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:
Not really if they are unarmed it's wrong and should be illegal.
Typical American response though


Why do you think fists and feet can't be weapons? And apparently that they can't arm themselves from your own kitchen drawer after you've let yourself get tied up and robbed?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/29/man-convicted-in-nanny-cam-new-jersey-home-invasion-beating-gets-life-term.html
The woman here could've easily died, and that's just from one violent burglar.
I don't care if you're 15 or 50, unarmed, weak or strong. You break into a home, any sane person on earth would consider you a deadly threat.




They can but unless they go to attack you it should be considered manslaughter to kill them.
as i said Typical American response to kill someone just because you feel threatened and they are breaking the law......i find it really primitive.
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

D4nc3Style wrote:

If someone breaks into my house I don't know if they're armed or not, I'm not gonna wait and find out.
Typical non-American response.



No here we would hide or access the situation before running in gung-ho and killing the guy then getting sent to jail for manslaughter because the guy was unarmed and not attacking or running away.

Common sense mate if he is unarmed there is enough time to establish whether he is coming at you to hurt you or is harmless and you can scare him off.

Something tells me you have never had your house robbed and been there and scared off a robber before.
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/28/17

dulun18 wrote:


D4nc3Style wrote:

If someone breaks into my house I don't know if they're armed or not, I'm not gonna wait and find out.
Typical non-American response.




it's easy for one to pretend to be a pacifist and know exactly what to do in all kind of situations - while having little or no knowledge/experience what so ever (especially on the net) .. it's the era of the keyboard warriors after all..

if you know for sure which specific houses you can rob without getting shot.. I'm sure the criminals will love that and they will be visiting those particular houses more often





Well seeing as i have been robbed and i scared them off without hurting them as they were unarmed i think i can judge
i have the experience and know the laws in my area which are just killing someone who is not attacking you nor is a threat is wrong imo and should be fully punishable by law.

Think first shoot later.
7050 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
60 / M
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

Ryulightorb wrote:

Not really if they are unarmed it's wrong and should be illegal.
Typical American response though


Human nature is an American response?

When you are being attacked your mind shifts into one of two trains of action, fight or flight. Either you counter-attack or you run.

As far as stealing deserving death? Yeah it doesn't deserve death. But this isn't just someone stealing something and running off, this was a group of people invading someones home with who knows what intentions. They chose to break into that house, the home owner did not invite them in. The whole thing would've never happened if they had chosen to not break into that house.
29033 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 3/28/17 , edited 3/29/17

dark5pire wrote:

Human nature is an American response?

When you are being attacked your mind shifts into one of two trains of action, fight or flight. Either you counter-attack or you run.

As far as stealing deserving death? Yeah it doesn't deserve death. But this isn't just someone stealing something and running off, this was a group of people invading someones home with who knows what intentions. They chose to break into that house, the home owner did not invite them in. The whole thing would've never happened if they had chosen to not break into that house.



yes when you are being attacked someone breaking into your house with no weapons is not being attacked in that situation you don't do anything but access the situation.

The owner should of accessed if they had weapons or were a threat and if they had either or were (which they were in this case) then fought.

Think first shoot later.

It's as if people think you don't have time to think in a house robbery it makes me doubt many people here have been in many house robberies in their life.

Where i live people would do just as i do and what i said and have been shown to do so most of the times.

Everytime i hear about a thief in America is i hear homeowner shot unarmed thief or shop keeper shoots thief (when he should of just let the thief take the money i doubt they are trained well for criminal attacks if their first reaction is to fight).
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.