Another old man guns down thieves

[Nefastus]

Which makes this a revenge killing, aka: murder. Not self defense.

Quoted for truth. Thats plain murder. Not sure how it works in the USA but where I live he whould have a certain and long trip to the jail. Feels like he used the robbery as an excuse to kill people in cold blood.

[Beet]

1. You don't know their full story. They could have been desperate. That could be you one day.

2. Yes, it does send a message. To be armed and ready to kill if you're going to break into someone's house. Is that really the message you want to be sending?

/SIGH

I don't care about their full story. I've been in VERY rough times that I'd rather not discuss here, and I nor my family -ever- stole. It's unacceptable. There is always an alternative. And these guys have a police record already. I'm also willing to bet they're drug addicts.

No it sends a message that you don't break into old peoples houses just because you think they're old and feeble. I'm not defending what this guy did. He committed a crime, worse than theirs. But I'm sorry I don't have sympathy for the victims at all.

[MechaMoose]

1. You don't know their full story. They could have been desperate. That could be you one day.

2. Yes, it does send a message. To be armed and ready to kill if you're going to break into someone's house. Is that really the message you want to be sending?

/SIGH

actually it was reported these 2 had a history of crimes of theft or scam usually targeting the elderly

sources
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...icle-1.1880617

[Lord Havik]

The robbers are better off dead. A shame he hadn't got the male suspect as well.
That said... Castle laws only extend to one's immediate dwelling area. Once the suspects were out of his house and fleeing, he was not legally allowed to shoot them.
He will likely go to prison for shooting the woman. In all fairness he shouldn't as she had just got done burglarizing his home, but the law is the law and the law says you can't do what he did.

Official prediction: Aggravated Manslaughter charges.

[Lady Dragonheart]

That is really wrong, I'm glad the old man was armed and those criminals got what they deserved for trying to take advantage of the elderly again, considering that they had a long history of doing that to many people.

Myself, I am armed and I'm glad for it. If I wasn't, I would have been raped, dead, or much worse by now. Carrying a weapon is the best deterrence I can think of and I recommend it to anyone, male or female, regardless of age. It's saved my life multiple times now.

[Lady Dragonheart]

People tend to think that once they're carrying one.

It's also why they're dangerous, situations escalate far beyond where they otherwise were once one person pulls a gun.

Only, it's true, it does make you safer. I've been approached several times, and attacked twice in public and drawing my weapon was enough to make them think twice. I've only had to damage someone twice, and once wasn't with my weapon. In case you don't know, most people that carry weapons legally are trained in how to use them, that is what licenses, tests, and the pysch exams are for. Illegally having a weapon is wrong, and only criminals will illegally carry weapons with ill-intent. It's a proven fact, areas with strict gun laws have increased violent crime. It's all because of one simple reason, law-abiding citizens that have strict gun laws make easy targets for criminals that don't care about laws.

[-aiko-]

Myself, I am armed and I'm glad for it. If I wasn't, I would have been raped, dead, or much worse by now. Carrying a weapon is the best deterrence I can think of and I recommend it to anyone, male or female, regardless of age. It's saved my life multiple times now.

Veeeeeeeeeeery unlikely.

[PessimiStick]

1. You don't know their full story. They could have been desperate. That could be you one day.

Their story is 100% irrelevant. You break into someone's house to steal their shit and attack them, you deserve to die.

[pateuvasiliu]

Their story is 100% irrelevant. You break into someone's house to steal their shit and attack them, you deserve to die.

Ain't you a joy to behold.

[Deleted]

Their story is 100% irrelevant. You break into someone's house to steal their shit and attack them, you deserve to die.

Deserve according to whom, what quantifying metric do we use to establish the validity of death being meted out here?

Because according to every single law in the first world regarding self-defense, this was not self-defense; It was murder, pure and simple, and legal experts have opined he has a solid chance for conviction of the 2nd degree.

[Jinnobi]

Their story is 100% irrelevant. You break into someone's house to steal their shit and attack them, you deserve to die.

You win the Worst of the Internet award for 08/06/2014. We will remember you with rueful headshakes and sighs.

Because according to every single law in the first world regarding self-defense, this was not self-defense; It was murder, pure and simple, and legal experts have opined he has a solid chance for conviction of the 2nd degree.

The issue is that the murderer in question is 80 years old. How much longer does he have to live? Everyone knows he's statistically likely to die soon, so no one cares as much about his actual sentencing.

[PessimiStick]

Deserve according to whom, what quantifying metric do we use to establish the validity of death being meted out here?

Because according to every single law in the first world regarding self-defense, this was not self-defense; It was murder, pure and simple, and legal experts have opined he has a solid chance for conviction of the 2nd degree.

According to me. I'm not the only one, either. I may be in the minority, but that doesn't change my opinion.

He also has a chance to not be charged, since he's not dangerous to the public -- and a chance to not be convicted if the jury (or even a juror) thinks like I do.

[Repefe]

He also has a chance to not be charged, since he's not dangerous to the public -- and a chance to not be convicted if the jury (or even a juror) thinks like I do.

The important thing here is to establish that guns are for defense ... not to execute criminals who did something to you. His sentence for 2nd degree murder can be as low as 1.5 years in prison in Florida. But even that is not necessary. Important thing is to charge him. To say "you know what, you can't kill criminals running away from you when they are no longer near you or close vicinity of your home just to execute your idea of justice."

That's not why ppl should be allowed to carry guns. We have laws and trained law professionals to do that job. Guns in hands of normal citizens should be for defense.

Earlier on in this thread somebody linked a case where a father of two killed a drunken driver who killed both his kids in an accident. Much much much more justifyable situation ... still a crime. If you execute your idea of justice outside of self defense and kill somebody in the process, you need to be judged for it and if convinced face the punishment.

[PessimiStick]

The important thing here is to establish that guns are for defense ... not to execute criminals who did something to you. His sentence for 2nd degree murder can be as low as 1.5 years in prison in Florida. But even that is not necessary. Important thing is to charge him. To say "you know what, you can't kill criminals running away from you when they are no longer near you or close vicinity of your home just to execute your idea of justice."

That's not why ppl should be allowed to carry guns. We have laws and trained law professionals to do that job. Guns in hands of normal citizens should be for defense.

Earlier on in this thread somebody linked a case where a father of two killed a drunken driver who killed both his kids in an accident. Much much much more justifyable situation ... still a crime. If you execute your idea of justice outside of self defense and kill somebody in the process, you need to be judged for it and if convinced face the punishment.

I disagree. We're never really going to get past this ideological impasse. You think they deserve punishment, I don't.

[PLS]

Don't rob people?
I love how if he had shot her earlier he would have been exonerated by the people classifying this as murder.
Let's be clear here he could have told any story he wanted, but he didn't. Honesty

They chose to raise it to a violent level, they assaulted him, force plus one I say covers it pretty well. Someone assaults you and then because they run away/ beg for mercy you shouldn't take the opportunity to win?
What happens if he had lowered his gun and they just turned around and killed him, these people had assaulted him out of the blue you can't assume they would act in a rational manner as no actions up to this point would lead you to think they would, there were two people you can't cover two people with one gun. He felt threatened for his life? Justified

Don't start something you aren't prepared to finish, its like if you fight someone on the street, you have agreed legally to that fight just by participating. You can no longer charge each other with assault. They thought they would take advantage of an old man and where wrong.. oh well
He wanted to send a message and he did don't rob people because you might get killed.

He's old, he can plea about 100 things relating to his health and nothing will happen

For the record I think gun control is a good thing, but it wouldn't have changed this out come as at the end of the day it would just mean the weapon was registered to him and there isn't any issue in this case with a restricted weapon or no one claiming ownership.

[Repefe]

I disagree. We're never really going to get past this ideological impasse. You think they deserve punishment, I don't.

Does not matter what I or you think, the law qualifies their actions as crimes and you get punished for commiting them. That's all there is.

[PessimiStick]

Does not matter what I or you think, the law qualifies their actions as crimes and you get punished for commiting them. That's all there is.

Except that's really not all there is. Prosecutorial discretion, jury nullification, etc.

[cubby]

People tend to think that once they're carrying one.

It's also why they're dangerous, situations escalate far beyond where they otherwise were once one person pulls a gun.

You are correct, but the flip side is that one side is ready is escalate the situation to violence and the other side can only get completely asskicked.

[dextersmith]

1. You don't know their full story. They could have been desperate. That could be you one day.

The US is a country with social services, food stamps, food banks, subsidized rent, etc. What necessity could make them so desperate to steal? Drugs, alcohol, car payments, jewelry? Would a used tv pay for surgery? They took a chance on stupidity and deserved what they got. The "pregnant" woman lied to try to get mercy; how do you trust someone who burglarizes and beats you?