Man shoots and kills girl knocking on his door looking for help

[pateuvasiliu]

Oh, America.

I wonder what the gun crowd has to say about this.

[Tinykong]

The center of this case will be in determining if he was reasonable in believing his life was in jeopardy. Someone who is intoxicated, banging on your door and trying to get into your house (if that is indeed what happened) at 2am would cause me to be fearful for my safety.

[zoomgpally]

Reflex of what? What does that even mean? He pulled the trigger on reflex... I don't even...

Reflex grabbing shotgun, aiming and pulling the trigger of course.

[Bathory]

Eh what?..

Because after someone fucks up with a gun the NRA and 2nd amendment advocates usually rally behind them. I'm saying they need to condemn this and make a stand for responsible gun ownership, not another "He was acting within the rights of the 2nd amendment" etc etc

[spinner981]

Police get away with this all the time so I see no reason a regular person shouldn't as well.

That's a nice axe you got there. You must grind it daily.

[time0ut]

I am a gun owner and pro second amendment and I think that this guy should spend 20+ years in prison for this.

[dextersmith]

*He melted her face without aiming
*Had a "reflex reaction" when seeing her through a screen door
*It was a screen door but he asked no questions
*Couldn't find phone to call cops and still went to the door
*Burglars don't knock til you're awake

He clearly intended to kill

[time0ut]

*Burglars don't knock til you're awake

Home invaders might. Probably shouldn't open the door though.

[Slaskra]

This is exactly the type of people who the second commandment, er, amendment was meant to arm.

American citizens? Those are the only "exact type of people" the 2nd amendment is meant to arm.

This is a perfect opportunity for gun nuts to condemn this and show they aren't ridiculous and backward with their amendment..

I was thinking it was a good opportunity to show that even gun lovers respect certain limitations to gun use and that the "gun nut" title isn't always necessary. Guess I was wrong.

[Attackrabbit]

Why is the media so racist toward white people? The article is almost worded in a way to make you think (if you're not very intelligent ... which seems to be growing now a days) that he shot her because she was black, and that he new she was unarmed when she was at the door. It also conveniently hides how this person knocked at many doors at his house... and if this happened at my place I'd be like wtf.. as well.

Not to mention the fact he clearly states the first thing he did was look for his cell phone and that he couldn't find it. On top of them prosecution says he could have phone the police instead of using a weapon

Pretty much calls vast multitudes stupid then uses the wrong spelling of knew.
Well played.

[GreatOak]

Because after someone fucks up with a gun the NRA and 2nd amendment advocates usually rally behind them. I'm saying they need to condemn this and make a stand for responsible gun ownership, not another "He was acting within the rights of the 2nd amendment" etc etc

I don't know many people that defend murder. I'm a proud "gun nut" (who likes knives and blades more so I guess I'm a knife nut too) because I own a lot of weapons, train with them frequently, read up on new ones, etc. I like guns and knives like how some people like cars and celebrities. I think what this guy did was probably wrong. The arguments usually come from things that are in more of a gray area. We've got courts for a reason.

[Moadar]

That's a nice axe you got there. You must grind it daily.

As I often as I can brother.

[Brooxi]

Yeah, that's clearly the issue here, that poor white guy really needs our sympathy after that evil girl attacked his door and hit his buckshot with her face.



This is the problem with the criteria in the US right now though, it's really not about "reasonable" at all. Just say, "Oh, I was scared." and that's that, you're pretty likely to get a pass or something.

There's a case in Florida now where two men got into a fight, one stopped and walked away, and the other shot him in the back 10 times. Prosecutors decided not to charge him because, "Hey, he felt threatened."

It's just absurd.

I'm not saying he is innocent. I said the article is written in a very racist and offensive manner.

That said I don't know anything about this man. You can't judge an action or reaction simply on its own. Everyone has lived a very different life and had different personal interactions. A person that was abused as a child may find an action of someone offensive or not wanted that someone with a "normal" childhood wouldn't think anything of.

Pretty much calls vast multitudes stupid then uses the wrong spelling of knew.
Well played.

Spellchecker police out very quick today! I spell checked to the wrong word going threw my article... thanks though.

[Dookles]

It's a goddamn shotgun, you don't have to aim.

This is a perfect opportunity for gun nuts to condemn this and show they aren't ridiculous and backward with their amendment..

Contrary to uneducated popular belief, you do actually have to aim a shotgun. The spread in real-life is not nearly as wide or devastating as it is portrayed in videogames and movies. The main reasons that shotguns are recommended for home defense is their ease of use, reliability, and stopping power...not the fact that you "don't have to aim". In fact, the closer you are to your target, the narrower the spread is (the shot spreads out in a cone pattern, widening the further away your target is). In this situation, if he shot her in the face, he was most assuredly aiming it squarely at her head. This was no accident. I fully support gun rights, but unfortunately you can't legislate crazy people out of existence (if only!).

It's been said time and time again, but the problem here is the insane lunatic wielding the gun, not the gun itself.

[Zantos]

The center of this case will be in determining if he was reasonable in believing his life was in jeopardy. Someone who is intoxicated, banging on your door and trying to get into your house (if that is indeed what happened) at 2am would cause me to be fearful for my safety.

Thenn don't answer the door and shoot them if they succeed in getting in?

Common sense right there.

[Bathory]

I don't know many people that defend murder.

This same exact thing happened a few months ago, but it was a guy knocking. The amount of support for the shooter was disgusting. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the 2nd, but these people give everyone a bad name.

[Tinykong]

This is the problem with the criteria in the US right now though, it's really not about "reasonable" at all. Just say, "Oh, I was scared." and that's that, you're pretty likely to get a pass or something.

There's a case in Florida now where two men got into a fight, one stopped and walked away, and the other shot him in the back 10 times. Prosecutors decided not to charge him because, "Hey, he felt threatened."

It's just absurd.

Reasonable "at the time" is the important part. After the event as an outside observer, you know the other guy was just walking away. Is it reasonable for the victim to believe the guy was going to grab a weapon? Or in this case, reasonable to believe the person banging on the door intended to commit a home invasion?

It's real easy, with hindsight, to dismiss the defense's position.

- - - Updated - - -

Thenn don't answer the door and shoot them if they succeed in getting in?

Common sense right there.

Common sense and legal definitions don't always go hand in hand.

[Xisa]

He made a very poor judgement call, regrets it...but, you know, tough shit, you killed someone that posed you (or anyone around you, now that the car was stopped) no threat.

Prison it is. It's a shame it'll be his twilight years, but at least he'll get to experience them. Can't say the same for her.

[Zantos]

Common sense and legal definitions don't always go hand in hand.

Indeed. But at least then he would have reason to believe they are dangerous. Maybe a lesser sentence, if any, if she had forced her way in.

[Tinykong]

Is that REALLY the stance we want to take as our official legal policy? That if someone is walking away from you they MIGHT be going to get a gun so it's ok to shoot them? That if someone is knocking at your door they MIGHT be a serial killer so it's ok to shoot them?

I guess it'd be better to ask: Exactly what would be a situation where it's NOT ok to shoot someone, if not those?

Do you want victims to question whether or not they should defend themselves? Because that's what you're advocating here.