Man shoots armed intruders

Discussion in 'General Weapons Discussion' started by KenpoTex, Oct 16, 2004.

  1. raedyn

    raedyn Guest

    Does the American justice system truly claim to rehabilitate criminals? Oy! I don't think that locking someone up can count as rehab. Rehabilitation (which doesn't always work) must include interventions like addictions counselling, upgrading education, developing work skills, etc.

    What qualifies as a vast majority? Based upon what studies? And what are you calling rehab?
     
  2. raedyn

    raedyn Guest

    While this is true for some criminals, it certainly doesn't apply to all of them. Some criminals live very well on the fruits of their 'labours'. Think of any major fraud artist. (There's a famous case here in Canada of a guy working at a bank that fraudulently acquired MILLIONS for himself and his family) Hell, think of Martha Stewart! She's got plenty of wealth, and she's a convicted criminal, currently serving jail time.
     
  3. raedyn

    raedyn Guest

    My feelings exactly.
     
  4. Mark Weiser

    Mark Weiser Guest

    Reminds me of an ethics question from CJ 101

    An elderly man in a wheelchair goes into a local bank and brandishes a firearm and tells the teller to give him money. After the investigation it is found the elderly man was broke and needed surgery for a heart problem.

    Question: Would you throw the book at him or show compassion in convicting him?
     
  5. Flatlander

    Flatlander Grandmaster

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,785
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Location:
    The Canuckistan Plains
    Mark, I guess that would depend on whether or not someone had already shot him, wouldn't it?
     
  6. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Governments
    Judges
    Juries
    Governors
    Mothers
     
  7. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Almost every state law basically says that if you are in your house and somebody breaks/forces their way in you can use deadly force to terminate that burgulary...

    My state law (NY) says..

    In this case, the fact that the owner wasnt home when the burgulary was committed may throw a kink in a section like this, but as read it doesn't really state the "person in possession or control of" the dwelling actually has to be inside the dwelling at the time of the crime....dwelling meaning home, occupied building typically meaning business/office etc. that may be under guard.

    This is what case law and lawyers are for....
     
  8. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    In cases like this its "presumptive evidence" that a person forcing their way into a home or occupied building to commit a crime present a deadly threat to those people inside...
     
  9. michaeledward

    michaeledward Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,063
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Tgace ... (surprise) ... I agree that if you are in the home and someone enters clandestinely ... Bang Bang, He's dead.

    Although, seriously, I am still against guns. I think they harm more than they protect innocent people. But that is a different discussion.

    It was the fact that the bad guys were, apparently, fleeing that poses an ethical question (not a legal one). Several posters have touched on the 'Shoot-Don't Shoot' decision that I am asking about. I was a bit surprised and quite pleased that some indicated that they would not shoot based on the evidence we have available (which I agree is incomplete).

    Then again, those who thought that intruders were always "in season" have been noticably quiet.

    Legally though, if the invader is fleeing, has the commission of the burgurlary already been terminated, does this present another 'kink' in the case.

    And please ... in this instance ... the intruder got every bit of what he deserved, and perhaps got off easy, but I repeat, the homeowner could not have known that when he drew his weapon.
     
  10. Flatlander

    Flatlander Grandmaster

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,785
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Location:
    The Canuckistan Plains
    What a difference in our laws. It's quite shocking.
     
  11. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Now...were the BG's inside the house when the homeowner started shooting and they ran afterwards -OR- did the BG's run from the house and the homeowner started shooting at them as they ran??

    I ask because in the first case you could argue "there were four guys burglarizing my home...when I saw them and they saw me I reasonably believed they would harm or kill me trying to escape." The law dosent (in my example at least) state you have to be inside or on your property before the crooks try to get in.

    If its the other case, its not so clear.
     
  12. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Can you find and post yours? Just for educational purposes.
     
  13. michaeledward

    michaeledward Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,063
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    158
    We have several news reports concerning the events. Here are the facts as I understand them.

    1)The homeowner was not at home when the intrusion began.
    2)The homeowner came home at approximately 7:00 AM.
    3)As he walked up onto his porch, he noticed a couple of men inside the house, and a couple of men outside the house.
    4)The intruders exited the building to the rear of the house, where a white jeep was parked.
    5)The homeowner fired his weapon TO STOP the intruders.

    Exactly where the intruder who got shot in the left side of his face was when struck with the bullet is not clear (inside the house, outside the house, in the jeep). The most clear report states:

    "Four people exited the residence rapidly and shots were fired."


    I read that sentence as the intruders ran away first, got shot at second. Others don't see that same sequence of events. ​

    As mentioned, I remain open to new facts, but we are all working with incomplete information.​
     
  14. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Also, dont forget...this did happen in the South. Things are different there on the topic of self-defense (person or property) than they would be in NYC, Baltimore, Boston etc.
     
  15. Sharp702

    Sharp702 Guest

    Everyone can decide. Who do you think has more of a right to live, the guy in the story(a home owner, works, pays taxes, a normal productive citizen) or the criminals(felons, tax burdens by being in prison, harmfull to normal members of society..ect) ?


    Obviously that is extreme, and I meant thieves, murderers, rapists...ect


    I said what I did to illistrate that people must take their protection in their own hands because the law cannot do anything until you become a victim.

    Over 70% of all prisoners released will repeat crimes and go right back into the system. As for rehab they are offered counselling, some education..ect.

    That is a rare instance. Majority of criminals owned little to nothing before they commited a crime. Another percentage fall in the lower-middle class, lossing a $60,000 home is hardly payment for taking someones life or other crimes.
     
  16. KenpoTex

    KenpoTex Senior Master

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    Springfield, Missouri
    A couple of thoughts...

    We'll probably never know the exact chronology of events in this incident. Did they run because he shot? Did he shoot to keep them from getting away? Which came first, the chicken or the egg... The laws in most states are going to be fairly similar as far as what constitutes reasonable force in this type of situation. By inadvertantly walking in on 4 guys in the act of burglarizing his house he was walking into a dangerous, and very possibly deadly situation and I in no way feel that the use of a firearm would be excessive in that situation. If they immediately tried to flee when he arrived then he probably shouldn't have opened fire. Like I said, we'll probably never know exactly how it went down.

    As far as using force (lethal or not) to protect property, As I said in an earlier post, I think there are greater issues involved than a simple transfer of property and would (in most cases) resist by any means necessary and available. If you want to roll over and surrender because of your ethical/religious/philosophical beliefs, that's your decision. Just don't demonize those of us who adhere to a different viewpoint.

    Guns: good or evil, feasible or not...We've been over this one before many times, I don't feel like going through it again. Believe and think what you will, just leave me and my guns alone.

    Violent Criminals and the "so called" Corrections System: Murderers, Kiddnappers, Rapists, Robbers, etc. are TRASH! They are not going to be rehabilitated no matter how many correspondence courses they take, or how many touchy-feely counseling sessions they attend while they're behind bars. As far as I'm concerned anyone convicted of 1st degree murder, kidnapping, rape, or child-molestation should automatically get the death penalty. The current corrections system is a failure. Someone stated that the recidivism rate is around 70%. I seem to remember that it was closer to 80% but whatever. Either way, something is wrong. When these scumbags are in prison they have access to cable TV, Internet, and workout facilities. Furthermore, prisons are required to maintain a law-library so that these low-lifes can spend their time (when their not bulking up in the weight room or dealing drugs in the yard) screwing, oops, I mean suing the government for every reason under the sun. Most prisons no longer have license-plate or furniture factories becuase making the poor underpriveledged babies actually do something constructive is "cruel and unusual" in these days of political correctness. Prison is supposed to be a punishment for a crime. That is not to say that I think the inmates should be tortured or mistreated. I just find it disgusting that they can enjoy a better standard of living in prison than they do on the outside. Or for that matter, a better standard of living than many hard-working, law-abiding citizens in society.
    I would personally be thrilled if most (if not all) prisons resembled "Tent City" Sheriff Joe Arpaio's jail down in Maricopa County, Arizona. Maybe then they wouldn't want to go back.

    Okay, I'm done ranting for now.
     
  17. michaeledward

    michaeledward Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,063
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    158
    You know, I always thought the english language was a pretty powerful way of describing things, able to represent accurately a vast quantity of ideas, actions and things. Seems to me that we can gain a pretty clear understanding of what happened by using our language. For instance, the conjunction 'and' not only brings together two phrases and clauses, it also indicates a sequence for those phrases and clauses. So, when a sentence says:

    "Four people exited the residence rapidly and shots were fired."

    it is clear that the four people exited the residence rapidly before the shots were fired.

    Who is 'demonizing' whom?
    Using the terms 'roll over' and 'surrender' give a pretty clear connotation as to your beliefs: that your possessions are more important than a human life. Or maybe that your right to fire a weapon (the 2nd Amendment) is more important than a human life.

    I hope that none of us are ever in the situation described in this article. But if the choice is between someone being on my property and someone being shot in the face, I do not think these two evils are equal.
     
  18. Tgace

    Tgace Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    408
    Trophy Points:
    208
    Where are you finding the..."Four people exited the residence rapidly and shots were fired."? Ive searched for more articles on this shooting and all I can find is the same article that started this thread and it says.
     
  19. Bammx2

    Bammx2 2nd Black Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    London England
    My 2 bits.....

    I have been reading this whole thing since it was started and have come to a conclusion....
    It doesn't matter how many times someone can quote an ammendment.
    it doesn't matter if some think "some people just need killin".
    This whole thread seems to be turning into a dead-horse kickin contest.
    The deed was done. its over.
    We know certain people don't agree and we know certain people do.
    This is a good forum and good people are getting heated over difference of
    opinions.
    Nobody is gonna give in either way.
    live with it!
     
  20. michaeledward

    michaeledward Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,063
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Tgace, thank you for asking. The link to the Shelby County Sherriff's office is here

    http://www.shelbyso.com/news.php

    The fourth article down the link contains that exact text. Later reports from newspaper websites don't include the same text, nor do they include the text:

    "He fired several shots from a handgun in an attempt to stop the suspects"


    The complete text is quoted here. I have changed the format of the text in question.





    [/font]
    [/font]123
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

content