Court case: How far can people go in defending their home from intruders?

[Madison320]

Did your 5 year old repeatedly burglarize that home previously and violently?

You're missing the point. I'm not claiming that these situations are identical. I'm disproving the argument that any trespasser can be killed, no questions asked. I'm assuming you don't think it's ok to shoot a 5 year old who accidentally wanders into your house.

As to this specific case, I still need more facts. How was the home burglarized violently? Was the homeowner there? Also from what I read there was only one reported break in.

 

[bunklocoempire]

Exactly. I wish it was an easy call, but it's not. There's a lot of gray area in this situation. I hate gray areas, but that's reality sometimes. This case is somewhere in between an innocent kid wandering into the wrong house and a group of heavily armed gangsters breaking down the front door. I'm still trying to figure this one out.

What do you want to accomplish?

Do you want to promote the individual and natural rights which demand courage and your participation as far as a relationships with your neighbors and your own self defense? Be warned, the ugly/frail nature of man WILL show up. It is never totally smooth sailing.

or,

Do you want to promote man made laws that overreact and encroach on individual liberty when man's ugly/frail nature occasionally shows up? The ugly/frail nature of man WILL show up. The new laws that are constantly piled on top of old laws WILL overreach.

What direction followed has already given us the police state we are currently in? The latter has given us what we currently have.

The teens were responsible for their actions just as Smith reacting to their actions on his own property was responsible for his own actions, with that said, the adult pushers of the "law" in that town and the parents failed those teens miserably. Somehow the message was conveyed that if you mess with people and the extensions of those people (their property) nothing too terrible is likely to happen to you if the "law" is worth a damn. The "law" failed those teens (and Smith) in life and now the "law" wants to stick it to Smith after the teens are dead. Yes, the law that failed to protect Smith in the first place is given another chance to accomplish...?

Recognizing Smith's rights would have gone a long way to keep those teens alive. Which do you think those teens were respecting when Smith finally solved his burglary problem? Natural rights/natural law or man made law?

I've mentioned this many times but this is what I was taught by my folks:

"You go messing around with so and so's property and your apt to get shot -and I wouldn't blame them"

That was taught to me when we lived in the country so I would've been 4-5 years old at the time. Just like your grandson.

My parents put the fear of God in me when it came to respecting other's property. It wasn't because my folks wanted to see me and other kids gunned down by a neighbor -but rather the exact opposite. My parents knew the importance and wisdom of self policing.

 

[aGameOfThrones]

I'm envisioning the neighbor's kid accidental hitting his baseball into the guys yard and then the kid gets blasted for trying to retrieve it.

I always asked my neighbor for permission every time that happened to me, but I'm weird like that. He didn't kill no kids playing baseball, he killed 2 terrorist.

 

[FloralScent]

If the boy put his hand up for the second shot, he wasn't "down."

He could have just as well pulled a gun on the old man. Injuring someone with a bullet wound doesn't mean they can't pull out a gun and shoot you. Does he know no more perps are coming down after him, two already did.

I may have misread that part but what about the girl? A little murderous eh?

 

[qh4dotcom]

Something else no one has thought of....

This man is 65 years old....therefore he has an increased risk for heart disease, stroke, etc compared to a younger person...from what I read in the article, he lived alone.

So if he suffers a stroke, heart attack, etc....should anyone break into his home to save him and risk getting shot.....or do they need his permission to come in while he is unconscious so no one gets shot?

 

[Danke]

I may have misread that part but what about the girl? A little murderous eh?

Then our military if full of murderers.

I don't agree with his actions, but he also didn't know if they were armed and could not fight back if not neutralized with others possibly coming down the steps after him.

 

[aGameOfThrones]

Something else no one has thought of....

This man is 65 years old....therefore he has an increased risk for heart disease, stroke, etc compared to a younger person...from what I read in the article, he lived alone.

So if he suffers a stroke, heart attack, etc....should anyone break into his home to save him and risk getting shot.....or do they need his permission to come in while he is unconscious so no one gets shot?

Some would say that's Reason enough to finish them off. If he suffered a stroke or Heart attack I would imagine any thief would have free-rein over his belongings. Now, if someone who cares for his well being goes and checks on him after having a stroke or heart attack without his permission... What could he do about it? Nothing.

 

[Ender]

Then our military if full of murderers.

I don't agree with his actions, but he also didn't know if they were armed and could not fight back if not neutralized with others possibly coming down the steps after him.

Agreed.

 

[qh4dotcom]

Some would say that's Reason enough to finish them off. If he suffered a stroke or Heart attack I would imagine any thief would have free-rein over his belongings. Now, if someone who cares for his well being goes and checks on him after having a stroke or heart attack without his permission... What could he do about it? Nothing.

I am talking about a stranger breaking into his home to save him, not someone who knows him and cares for his well being.

I live in a condo and the HOA has the right to come into my home and even break into my home if no one lets them in...so should an HOA employee get shot for breaking into my home?

 

[FloralScent]

Then our military if full of murderers.

Absolutely

I don't agree with his actions, but he also didn't know if they were armed and could not fight back if not neutralized with others possibly coming down the steps after him.

I have no idea what he was thinking.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

A few years ago my 5 year old grandson was visiting and he accidently went into my neighbors house because both our houses look similar. I'm glad this guy wasn't my neighbor.

That used to be status quo. It still is in some communities. Kids would wander everywhere. Guess they need body armor now to go along with the helmets.

Did your 5 year old repeatedly burglarize that home previously and violently?

I have been curious since this story broke...what is meant by "violently"? I have not read any explanation or details on that.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Does anyone think that this man is a threat to society or any other individual in any way? Does anyone think he would have killed - or, if freed, would kill - any other person?

Yes. I think he has the same potential to kill again as anyone who kills out of revenge or over neighbor disputes.

Is there anyone seriously defending the supposed "kids" who broke in with intent to harm?

No one is defending these dumb ass kids. Two wrongs don't make a right. Who knows whether they had intent to harm? Steal, yes. Intent to harm needs to be proven.

Anyone who thinks otherwise deserves to have his own children raped in front of him.

Really?

 

[Ender]

Yes. I think he has the same potential to kill again as anyone who kills out of revenge or over neighbor disputes.



No one is defending these dumb ass kids. Two wrongs don't make a right. Who knows whether they had intent to harm? Steal, yes. Intent to harm needs to be proven.



Really?

So...... someone breaks into your house multiple times and you are supposed to wait and see if they'll hurt you first?

This wasn't a "neighbor dispute"; this was some old guy who was afraid- what would you do in his place? Fix dinner and ask those who are breaking and entering to sit down and have a bite?

Unless I'm missing something, the man didn't know who the perps were and I'm sure he didn't know how dangerous they might be. Most any teen can take on a 65 yr old man- even a girl.

This whole forum is always shouting: "DON'T CALL THE COPS!" But when someone defends themselves and their property against thieves, then they are bad?

 

[aGameOfThrones]

I am talking about a stranger breaking into his home to save him, not someone who knows him and cares for his well being.

I live in a condo and the HOA has the right to come into my home and even break into my home if no one lets them in...so should an HOA employee get shot for breaking into my home?

Samething with a stranger trying to save him... Can't do much when you're unconscious. and how would the stranger even know? He's gonna random break-in to see if someone had a heart attack? You agreed to HOA rules, right? Why would an HOA employee get shot for following agreed upon rules? HOA suck... this is known. I don't think he agreed to being broken into for the purpose of getting robbed.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

So...... someone breaks into your house multiple times and you are supposed to wait and see if they'll hurt you first?

This wasn't a "neighbor dispute"; this was some old guy who was afraid- what would you do in his place? Fix dinner and ask those who are breaking and entering to sit down and have a bite?

Unless I'm missing something, the man didn't know who the perps were and I'm sure he didn't know how dangerous they might be. Most any teen can take on a 65 yr old man- even a girl.

This whole forum is always shouting: "DON'T CALL THE COPS!" But when someone defends themselves and their property against thieves, then they are bad?

So let's get this straight, you and others are defending shooting a girl, and when she falls down the stairs and is laying on the ground, shoot her again, then grab her body and drag it to a TARP and stack it on the other body. And then grab her by the head and shoot her again in the head because she is still moving. Is that what you people are defending?

 

[ghengis86]

That used to be status quo. It still is in some communities. Kids would wander everywhere. Guess they need body armor now to go along with the helmets.



I have been curious since this story broke...what is meant by "violently"? I have not read any explanation or details on that.

I would think kicking a door in or smashing a window would be a 'violent' B&E. also, physical assault.

Picking the lock a la cat-burglar, not so violent.

With regard to this case, I have no idea. The above is just my take.

 

[leverguy]

No one is defending these dumb ass kids. Two wrongs don't make a right. Who knows whether they had intent to harm? Steal, yes. Intent to harm needs to be proven.

So stealing doesn't count as harm then? If your home was repeatedly burglarized would you feel harmed? Life, liberty, property - the basic inalienable rights. Infringement on any of these, including property, harms me.

Maybe the rape thing was a bit over the top, but it fittingly matches the absurdity level that this whole argument has achieved.

 

[rpfocus]

So let's get this straight, you and others are defending shooting a girl, and when she falls down the stairs and is laying on the ground, shoot her again, then grab her body and drag it to a TARP and stack it on the other body. And then grab her by the head and shoot her again in the head because she is still moving. Is that what you people are defending?

Don't forget, after he shot her twice she supposedly 'laughed at him.' So he shot her in the head. The guy is a loon and a bloodthirsty idiot, but many have no problem with setting him free on the streets. 'Murica!

 

[angelatc]

So let's get this straight, you and others are defending shooting a girl, and when she falls down the stairs and is laying on the ground, shoot her again, then grab her body and drag it to a TARP and stack it on the other body. And then grab her by the head and shoot her again in the head because she is still moving. Is that what you people are defending?

Technically, she was a woman because she was 18. Teen still works though.


I can't speak for the others but yes. As distasteful as it is, I am defending exactly that. They started it, they brought it to his home. He finished it.

 

[angelatc]

Don't forget, after he shot her twice she supposedly 'laughed at him.' So he shot her in the head. The guy is a loon and a bloodthirsty idiot, but many have no problem with setting him free on the streets. 'Murica!

SO which is it? Was she quivering, cowering, and begging for her life? Or was she callous enough that she was laughing and mocking the old man she was victimizing, even though he had already shot her friend dead, and also put 2 bullets into her?