Did someone really question why the old man had a gun? he’s been robbed FOUR times! And he’s 80, come on now
Who said anything about 1st degree murder?
This is second degree at most and manslaughter in best case.
The bitch died whatever. How he killed her makes it murder. Especially in california where stand your ground does not exists.
Lucky she wasn’t black otherwise we’d have another shit storm
reading the title I though he shot a pregnant cat that tried to steal his food. wtf!
burglars usually target those groups of people, preferably if they live alone. In a lot of cases they kill them, sometimes accidentally (eg asphyxiation)
he should have shot her legs instead
You did. When you said it was premeditated. That’s what first degree murder is.
Since a fetus isn’t a real person, even if she were pregnant why should anyone give a fuck? I would have shot them, too. Fuck Bush Jr. and his defense of fetuses.
But you guys are a bit off. Self-defense stipulations vary state to state so in his home state it is possible for it to count as self-defense. You all putting your morality into it need to take a step back.
He was robbed, he was attacked, he was hurt in his arm and neck, the woman had beaten up him repeatedly, and then she tried to use a damn sexist excuse (aka A LIE) to escape unpunished.
The old man was right on being completely pissed off by that. If the girl was so shameless to think that after robbing and repeatedly beating up a defenseless old man, being also the worst mother in the world would have saved her life, I would have shot her too.
I love the weak bitches that always talk about how you SHOULD act in a situation like this. You’re 80 years old, sleeping peacefully in your home then somebody breaks in and starts beating you half to death to occupy you while somebody else tries to steal your most prized possessions. You somehow get a hold of your gun but DON’T USE IT because that woman could potentially turn her life around! SMH
If it was an old lady you guys would be calling her a badass.
This reminds me of the time a friend of mine had his house broken into.
They where held at gunpoint, but turned the tables.
Long story short, the other dude ran, one of them was tackled on the floor and was beaten so bad he had to be hospitalized. The poli
your dumb. had he done that he would havr been liable for medical expenses. you shoot to kill not incapicate
I believe this was already explained by the poster you quoted.
Those two would get off pretty light and end up suing the old guy.
As further details from the case emerge I’m getting a clearer picture of the facts. I retract my earlier statements. Fuck that bitch.
How do you expect people do read your post if you apparently didn’t even read the news article?
Stopped after that sentence. Smh.
It’s a pretty frightening view from a non-US citizen to see how many ppl want the thieves rather dead than face the court.
Especially some guy stating he’d be fine with that old geezer shooting them a few days/weeks later, if he met them by chance.
wth.
it’s a difference in conditioning.
In other countries you’re conditioned to believe that only bad guys own firearms, and that “qualified” government institutions are the only ones allowed to own firearms.
IDK what’s so frightening about the idea that when a thief enters a man’s property his rights are voided, and if that thief attacks the man on his own property, he voids his life.
well the US amazing ability to indoctrinate the majority of its population into believing the right to bear arms so they can fantasize about being the punisher is one thing but executing thieves on the whole is a bit far, you sound like you wanna live in saudi arabia or some crazy shit like that.
Need to know where to draw a line, if this happened to a guy in his 30s i would say the entire situation changes. Cant be a young dude and just cap people trying to escape cause you got an injury thats nonsense, a very old man however I say the case changes, least of all lol wtf is gonna put a guy in jail thats practically dead anyway?
Its not to say the rules dont apply to old people, but most law carry a compassionate disposition for shit like this.
Sorry if I can’t express it properly, as I’m not a native speaker.
But quite a few posts in this thread make it seem that there’s a severe lack of faith in your system.
People want the culprits rather dead than face justice, it’s fine to just shoot them - it’s even better to annihilate their existence!
Eye for an eye shouldn’t be the way to go nowadays.
Robbery is shit. Beating up an old man is even worse. They deserve severe punishment, that’s for sure.
But people trying to legitimate it by him being old, being robbed 3 times before so it’s now fine to just kill someone because he’s angry?
[e] Even though I don’t know how many people here are actually from the US.
It’s not the Government doing the indoctrination, the government would actually rather you don’t own anything for self defense. (Their rhetoric and reasoning for banning things is proof enough) The senators that say no to gun legislation either say no because of the firearm lobby, or because they have some crude understanding that more firearm restriction do not work (which I doubt they are doing it for the greater good, LOL). (Look up Washington DC, Chicago, and New York banning things does not work)
The increase in federal restrictions and outright banning of firearm’s is only going to polarize people and force individuals to behave more erratically (When you have states like New York, Massachusetts passing laws like they did after Sandy Hook they way they did, you aren’t going to convince people that state or federal governments can pass logical regulations).
The line is drawn in California, and he is going to get charged if he shoot her outside what would be considered “his” property. His defense is going to be “crime of passion/heat of moment”. You assume the United States is to grey, but that’s because stand your ground (Florida has the most extreme and illogical stand your ground laws) exists only in specific states and get way to much media hype. That is not indicative of trends in the United States.
that sort of reasoning (it’s ok to execute) makes it difficult to protect yourself as needed because you get Social Warriors saying criminals have “rights” (To a certain degree they do). They way it’s set up, is that that IIRC, every state has “castle” laws. That is, you are within your legal right to defend your property, yourself, and anybody inside with appropriate force.
In states like Texas, you have the right to use any force necessary provided it’s inside your property and said individual broke into your house. In states like California, the same laws exist, however you do not have the right to use whatever force necessary. If it’s found that you used “too” much force, you can get charged with manslaughter, murder, etc. That usually happens if it’s found out that you “executed” the criminal, that is you shot him while he “gave” up, or was running away. That’s why self defense firearm courses in the state of California teach you to “shoot to kill” on sight. It’s safer (for you and your neighbors) and easier legally if you do that, instead of telling them “freeze!”
So self-defense, even without a firearm, is a tricky matter in states like California. But anyway, because of how the laws and culture (gun) varies from region to region, you get some folks agreeing that he was within his legal rights to kill her. And you get others that are saying no he wasn’t.
People are forgetting this guy just got brutally beaten, his collarbone is broken, he is probably enraged. It is easy to sit behind a computer screen and calmly go, well this wouldn’t be right. These fine young folk are fleeing, yes they just beat me down, and yes they may return with weapons and finish the job, but I shall let them go and call the police. After all that is the gentlemanly thing to do. No most likely the old man was like this…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSZm7Yy5Wzw
State of mind plays a role in cases like this, it would be a travesty if this old man is charged with anything.
lol
i wish your home got robbed and you got beat up, then maybe you’d stop sympathizing with scumbags. first off, for all we know the woman was lying about being pregnant, and once the old man was off his guard she could have overpowered and killed him. she is scum enough to rob and beat an old man, she would be scum enough to turn the tables. or she could have simply fled and brought in backup. who knows if the police were on the way. the guy had gotten away, so he could have been going to get backup or better weaponry as well. the dude was just eliminating a threat who was a net detriment to the world. good fucking riddance. i got zero sympathy for disgusting human beings who break into other people’s homes.
before i knew what guns looked like, some dude pulled a starter pistol on me on campus (the ones that look like revolvers, not the big orange ones). a group of people walked around the corner and startled him when he had the gun pointed at my head. the gun went off as he turned to run away. i have the strangest feelings towards that incident. back then i thought i was dead, but it didn’t resonate with me until a few days later. i would have periods of nervousness for several weeks. but now sometimes i even forget it happened.
if that incident happened again and i had a gun on me, i think i would have shot him.
Here’s the thing, Fish. Old homie got his ass whooped by some scumbags who broke in, right? Right. This is known, confirmed, undeniable fact. You wanna know something else that’s a known, confirmed, undeniable fact? Old homie left the room and went and grabbed his gun and came back. RIGHT THERE is where NORMALLY self-defense goes out of the window. Remember that black chick in Florida who fired a warning shot at her husband after she left the house to get her gun? She got charged for that.
Another thing that’s an known, confirmed, undeniable fact is that he fired on them IN his home (NORMALLY fine), he then chased them off his property (again NORMALLY fine), but then he continued chasing them out of his jurisdiction and out of the realm of reasonable self defense. If you can get away with that, where’s the limit? Once she hit that alley, she was on public property. Can you just chase someone for a mile and shoot them in the back after they beat you up and claim self defense? No. Nigga, you’re a hunter now.
I mean, I’m not a law professional but, dude is getting charged with murder, b. Unless they are currently in your home or currently whooping that ass or currently preparing to whoop that ass, you don’t get to claim self defense against an unarmed person.