Man Kills Two Teens Robbers

[Synros]

Bit suprised how many that think it's fine to kill people that enters your home.
Worse with those that don't even care about the execution. Rather sick thread.

So what your saying is if I broke into your home, started stealing your shit and possibly had a weapon on me to attack anyone who would stop me, that you would sit back and let me do that, because you feel you have no right protecting what is your from pathetic fucks who think they have the right to take from others? Alright, give me your address, I'll be right over.

[semaphore]

The other is not defending anything

Killing defenseless teenagers while they lay bleeding is not defending anything.

[Judson]

Why don't you apply the same logic to every other thing?

Accidentally bumped into someone? How do you know they won't get pissed and follow you into a backalley and then take revenge by murdering you? Better kill them right there.

Sold a customer a bad product? How do you know they won't come back and shoot you in revenge? Better stalk them and muder them in their sleep.

Got into a bar fight? How do you know they won't take revenge on your family? Better nuke the whole city!

right except that in my example a person actually broke in to your home and proved they have both the ability and willingness to invade your house and do harm to your family

[Deleted]

The kids put themselves in danger. They got served.

Look, not everyone is insanely murderous like you. Guy executes someone and you consider it being served, get help.

[Deleted]

This just emphasizes the fact, that the gun law in the US is insane. I think he's entitled to defend his own property, but what's he's doing is simply just coldblooded murder.
In DK almost no one owns a gun, but that doesn't mean we have a higher degree of robbers. I just think the mentality in the USA is wrong. To think that it's a "constitutional right" to kill to kids, because they broke into your house is wrong!
Instead of just executing them, you should look at the "symptoms": why did they break into his house?

[semaphore]

right except that in my example a person actually broke in to your home and proved they have both the ability and willingness to invade your house and do harm to your family

A person who punched you in the bar, actually punched you and proved they have both the ability and willingness to punch you and harm you.

No difference.

[Judson]

I do, and its why the Castle law exists. It does not cover killing incapacitated individuals however. I do not believe in punishing people now for the potential of future crimes. I dont want America to turn into the Minority Report.

as well as I would disagree with punishing the hungry just for the possibility that they may steal bread......

but the fact is that if someone breaks in to your home they prove they have both the capability and willingness to do it not only that time but any time in the future

[larrakeyah]

Every judge will consdier this malicious aforethought.

No lol, there's absolutely no premeditation, coup de grace was done in the heat of the moment. Prosecute him on charges of first degree and he will walk free.

[Silhouette of Seraphim]

Instead of just executing them, you should look at the "symptoms": why did they break into his house?

Because they were asshole and tweakers.

There's no saying what they'd have done to get their fix.

[Banky.Edwards]

clicked the link, scrolled down to the pics of the teens. they both look like douches who would scream #YOLO while trying to rob someone on thanksgiving. good riddance.

[Judson]

A person who punched you in the bar, actually punched you and proved they have both the ability and willingness to punch you and harm you.

No difference.

punching you at a bar and entering your home where they can do harm to your children is not the same thing

[Leialyn]

American History X ?

[araine]

I am usually against the death penalty but if you beg hard enough i will make an exception to this useless POS gun owner that think he is the judge jury and executioner all at once.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Every judge will consdier this malicious aforethought.

NO they wont, and they will divorce themselves from being overly emotional and asking and answering the same questions that seem to elude you.


Was this man defending his life? Yes
Was the Force Reasonable? Seeing as how he is 64 years old an probably unable to flee, hiding in the basement. YES
Could this situation in any way have been avoided? Maybe up to council to argue


Sentencing?

If Found Guilty is this man a danger to society? Well unless he has killed anybody else or had a violent history, unless someone BREAKS into his home the answer is NO

So Prison or Jail Time, not Likely


He isn't going to pay restitution because there is none.


He could lose a Civil Case if found guilty, but defending on how that is defined it depends.


And since I live in Minnesota, Ill keep my eyes and ears out for this, because, I am 100% sure, this guy won't be convicted, nor will he serve a day in jail outside of the time he isn't able to bail out. Her most likely will not be found guilty but if he is, he won't get anything other than time served and probation that is it.

[Elim Garak]

It is very damn well relevant when you start claiming killing her was merciful.

That that we do not know is irrelevant here. If I can't call it mercy - you can't call it murder.
You still refuse to look at it in HIS perspective. He might've thought it was mercy. It's that thought that matters. Until you can dismiss it (with counter evidence) - you can't ignore it. By ignoring it - you are not objective.

And all of those shots were murderous.

No. Self-defense. He saw her going down the stairs. Just her hips. And he shot her - in full right to do so.

This isn't a movie. Being shot isn't very fatal in general.

Ha-ha. Yeah, right. That of course depends on body part being wounded and weapon used, don't you agree? Hand wound is not fatal. I know.
Or when perp shoots thru a door or fence - bullet's speed is slowed and it doesn't inflict serious injuries - such gunshots are not fatal either. Even headshots.
Are you aware of that distinction?

Unusually low mortality of penetrating wounds of the chest. Twelve years' experience. Mandal AK & Oparah SS. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011 Sep;142(3):563-8.

No link no trust.

"Specifically, the mortality rate of gunshot wound of the heart 24.5%...

Are you sure that a bullet to the heart has only 24.5% mortality rate? Are you quoting right? Link or bigger context.

The mortality rate in noncardiac thoracic injuries is very low compared with that of cardiac injury."

You bolded the wrong part. Fixed. All's relative, you know.
I'm pretty sure a bullet to your liver/lungs is as fatal as in your heart - not as fast, but hey. It's not a race.

Comparison of the Costs of Acute Treatment for Gunshot and Stab Wounds: Further Evidence of the Need for Firearms Control, Mock, Charles; Pilcher, Susan; Maier, Ronald, Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 36(4):516-522, April 1994.

Again no link.

This source I believe gave a 22% mortality rate for gunshot wounds over 6 years at a Seattle hospital. Almost 2 decades ago.

What kind of gunshot wounds? Any, right? Also it's a hospital stats. How many die en route or before an ambulance?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/nyregion/03shot.html
If a gunshot victim’s heart is still beating upon arrival at a hospital, there is a 95 percent chance of survival, Dr. DiMaio said. (People shot in vital organs usually do not make it that far, he added.) Shots to roughly 80 percent of targets on the body would not be fatal blows, Dr. Fackler said.

Upon arrival at the hospital. Key words. Nice of him to mention people being shot into vital organs. Kinda diminishes that 95% survival rate - isn't it? Skewd stats are skewed.
Also note how he says "it's a matter of luck".
And yeah shots to arms and feet - are not fatal. We know that. Sad part is - most vital organs are in the chest area - well all of them 'cept for brain.
And you call that science?

Science.

It's just a word - hardly an evidence. And in the meaning of a word - it's just a tool, not the evidence. Care to be more specific?

[Doctor Amadeus]

I am usually against the death penalty but if you beg hard enough i will make an exception to this useless POS gun owner that think he is the judge jury and executioner all at once.

You mean, like you being Judge Jury and Executioner, on a man protecting himself and his home because AWW some cute kids died, let's not put the blame where it belongs.

[Crissi]

punching you at a bar and entering your home where they can do harm to your children is not the same thing

Its still doing you personal harm. Its still a crime. Do you see how silly a death sentence is now?

and no, 'FOR THE CHILDREN" isnt a logical argument. Its an emotional based one, and goodness knows we dont need emotions dictating justice.

anyways Im out. 630am.

[maxalyss]

While it is sad that these kids had to resort to this, you can't blame the 64 year old guy for protecting himself. I doubt these kids were robbing his house wearing their Sunday best and I doubt he even knew they were teenagers. That does not matter...in the heat of themoment you have to protect yourself, you aren't thinking clearly in these situations...for all he knew they were there to kill him, there could have been more coming. I'm sure he feels bad, but better them than him and I probably would have done the same thing.

[Deleted]

Yep. They broke into his home, and he killed them. I think he went too far, but in the end, they initiated any wrong doing by being where they shouldn't have been. I'm sorry, but whether they were popular or not doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. Apparently they're too stupid to know the difference between right and wrong.

What makes difference is the kids being unarmed, and the intent to kill by the 64y old guy. He deserves death penalty.

[araine]

You mean, like you being Judge Jury and Executioner, on a man protecting himself and his home because AWW some cute kids died, let's not put the blame where it belongs.

It isnt selfdefense when you kill people EXECUTION style and than fail to pick up the phone and call the authorities. Like i said i can be willing to waive my usual objections to the death penalty on a scumbag like this. No redeeming value of a gun thug like this with his ZERO respect for life and the law of the land.