Man Kills Two Teens Robbers

[Terridon]

That sounds great! Obama is so wonderful he can make criminals( people known for not following laws) abide by guns laws?
Also he can make sure the police are at the scene of all crimes 100% of the time before any damage can be done to law abiding citizens and their hard earned property?

It works in the civiliced world to have rules for weapons. There's a few gangs here that have weapons, but overall people don't have it.
If it's hard to come by, and you get a severe punishment for even carrying a knife, with no reason, less walk around with it, and less feel forced to carry one.
I have a bow and some knifes. Schweiz armyknife! Lethal i tell you.
The bow is because i want to hunt with it, and i sure as hell would never pull it against a human being.

I know it's hard to believe, but here theives don't carry weapons most of the time. They don't have reason to, since there's not really any risk of somebody blindly trying to kill you for the fun of it.
Yeah. I think he enjoyed his "righteous" killing of those kids.

Edit:
Most of the time = we have not a single gunning down of people in their home from theft this year, as far as i know.

[larrakeyah]

Pharmacist puts an invader down - ok with the law.
Pharmacist goes around the counter and executes the person - first degree murder.

Do I need to do simple word replacement for you or is that good enough?

Nothing in common, there's premeditation in the pharmacy case, not in the old man. They are charging with SECOND degree. As i wrote in my first post NO PREMEDITATION on the old man part. I have serious doubts they'll convict that guy even of manslaughter.

[Kasierith]

He needs help. He was a functional member of society until his victimization at the hands of these two criminals.

You realize that attempting to hide the evidence pretty much trashes his chance at an insanity plea, right?

[Moadar]

Yes that must be why he sat on a chair waiting for the girl to show up before shooting her too.

People become morbidly curious about someone they kill and will often stare at what they have done. He was out of it and the girl escalated the situation by coming after a person who had reached their mental breaking point. I am pretty shocked at the lack of compassion shown here.

[Spectral]

I'm just pointing out that you owe the chinese a LOT of money.

In the context of our economy, what we owe the Chinese isn't really all that much. The number just looks spectacularly large because you're coming from the view of a nation that'd rank about 14th in GDP among our metro areas.

The bulk of US govovernment debt is held by Americans.

And you know what it WAS the first option he could have called the police, instead of just going rambo style.

That surely would be my first option, as I've stated repeatedly. You haven't come up with some brilliant revelation to most people.

[Gavril]

Alright, I'll play along. Tell me. If you are fearing for your life.... do you reach down, grab the threat thus tying up your hands, and drag her across the floor? Doesn't the fact that he physically touched and moved her, and willingly got that close before finishing her off, not seem a little bit wrong for the "it was self defense" act?[COLOR="red"]

Sure he wasn't sure how many people were still upstairs to just leave her alive would be a uncertainty and potential risk and you are already in fear so not using your best judgement.

[Moadar]

You realize that attempting to hide the evidence pretty much trashes his chance at an insanity plea, right?

Not always. He didn't attempt to bury them or dispose of the bodies. Can't expect someone not in their right mind to behave like a rational person.

[celinamuna]

I believe he should be charged but definitely not with 1st degree and probably not even second.

[darkwarrior42]

I think it's okay to defend yourself IF you are being assaulted, but in this case the old man was the violater since he attacked them, when he WASN't being threatened, when he could have just called the police? Isn't it the authorities duty to protect us?

It's the duty of the authorities to protect the public and uphold the law, but that doesn't mean that the public should be powerless to defend themselves.

Remember, we're not talking about a guy stalking the streets looking for criminals. We're talking about people breaking into your home... and from what I've seen, your position is that if someone breaks into my home, regardless of how they behave or what they do, I have no right to do anything but call the police and hope they don't hurt me or take/break too much of my stuff.

(Personal note: When my father was younger, his apartment was broken into by a serial burgler who had a reputation for killing anyone he found at home. When said burgler broke into my father's apartment, he woke up and grabbed his gun... if my father hadn't shot first, he'd have been the one who was killed. Yes, he called the police, but there is no way the police would have ever arrived in time to do anything but clean up the mess.)

*shrug* I wouldn't shoot first necessarily, but if someone breaks into my home I'm making the assumption that they are armed and willing to kill, and I'm acting accordingly... because if I don't, I'm gambling my life and the life of my wife on that assumption. Yes, I'll call the police, but I"m not going to sit around doing nothing while the police are en route.

[Kasierith]

Nothing in common, there's premeditation in the pharmacy case, not in the old man. They are charging with SECOND degree. As i wrote in my first post NO PREMEDITATION on the old man part. I have serious doubts they'll convict that guy even of manslaughter.

Given what was presented in the article, and of course if the factual evidence is different the results would change as well, he very clearly committed second degree murder of the girl (not the boy). In certain states, it can even be interpreted as first degree murder as he physically positioned her in the place she was executed at. Each state defines the rational time needed for it to be premeditated differently.

[Deleted]

I don't care if they were popular or psychotic and in need of mental help. Also what assumption did i make, I made a statement. Money should be invested in reforms which work in a preventative manner to educate and rehabilitate potential criminals, rather than letting people deliver vigilante justice and unnecessary violence.

your assumption was that without the house owner's reaction they would have simply stolen something, leaving the house quietly without doing any harm to the old man. you think it is a " property stolen vs double homicide" case, how do you know that it wouldn't have been a single homicide/beatup case if the 2 criminals weren't stopped?

[Doctor Amadeus]

Give me a suitable reason for how a girl with several bullets in her chest as well as a rifle shot somewhere, who he felt safe enough to drag across the floor, constitutes an immediate threat to his life, and you *might* have a point.

I have a point whether you recognize it or not, or like it or not. But you and are having this discussion in the safety and quit of our own homes with a nice cup of hot chocolate and probably catching up on emails.


That isn't exactly the kind of mindset to be casting theories on what we would do in this horrific situation, Having your home broken into being 64 being he average probably scared pushing Senior, I can't imagine. I am not even sure he should have had access to a fire arm. I also find the death of these two teenagers while tragic, and NOT DESERVED, a consequence of a mortally bad decision.


But he didn't chase them out side or fire at them, he didn't run down the block or get in his car to follow them. He was angry scared in his basement and NOT in his right mind, how else could you explain his explanation of events.


Of course it's insane and not rational, but I wasn't in that house and neither do you, now when the Medical Examiner and the Investigators are done, and barring any additional information such as previous violent behavior or something, yeah he acted in a way i can only imagine I MIGHT.

[larrakeyah]

and argues that it wasn't murder because... he's not convicted yet?

Well he is right. Strictly speaking until he is sentenced he is not a murderer. It's the main pillar of western legal systems.

[semaphore]

People become morbidly curious about someone they kill and will often stare at what they have done. He was out of it and the girl escalated the situation by coming after a person who had reached their mental breaking point.

Yeah she was totally coming after him by "walking" down the stairs.

I am pretty shocked at the lack of compassion shown here.

So am I.

[Kavoo]

Break into someones house you dont know what you will find. In this case they found an armed senile man.

While I feel sorry for the teens families, I cant stop thinking they brought it into themselves. Sad.

[semaphore]

Well he is right. Strictly speaking until he is sentenced he is not a murderer. It's the main pillar of western legal systems.

No, striclty speakign until he is convicted he is not guilty.

A murderer who isn't convicted for whatever reason (besides that the facts says they coudln't have done it) can still very well be a murderer.

[Shammyspice]

This is the problem with allowing random citizens to have guns in their homes...some just don't have the ability to restrain themselves in certain situations. People think that just because laws allow them to defend themselves in their home, means they SHOULD use lethal force in every situation...

I am sure if this guy had pulled the gun on them and told them to get down, they would have complied, the old man should have called the cops and let them handle the situation. It seems he didn't even give the teens a chance to surrender themselves.

I don't condone the teens behavior, but death was not an appropriate sentence for them. Going to prison would have been much more satisfying.

[Kasierith]

Sure he wasn't sure how many people were still upstairs to just leave her alive would be a uncertainty and potential risk and you are already in fear so not using your best judgement.

So.... he was afraid of being attacked by people still upstairs... so he went to her, dragged her across the floor (probably no easy task for his age), thus removing his ability to defend himself should someone else come downstairs, and then shot her in the new position? Your argument would be far more feasible if he had delivered a finishing blow on the spot.

[maxalyss]

I think it's okay to defend yourself IF you are being assaulted, but in this case the old man was the violater since he attacked them, when he WASN't being threatened, when he could have just called the police? Isn't it the authorities duty to protect us?

2 strangers robbing an elderly guy isn't threatening? How do you know?

[Alkin]

Sure he wasn't sure how many people were still upstairs to just leave her alive would be a uncertainty and potential risk and you are already in fear so not using your best judgement.

If you were in his shoes, and you knew there were potentially dangerous people inside of your home, do you wait downstairs, killing them execution style as they come down the stairs, or do you leave the house, call the police, alert a neighbour? And don't use the whole 'he wasn't thinking clearly, it was all very traumatic for him' defence, because when it comes to killing someone in cold blood that defence doesn't really hold up.