• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Getaway driver arrested for murder.

Vixen said:
No, all they had was a knife and some brass knuckle dusters, according to early reports. In the USA if your accomplices in a felony die, for whatever reason in the course of the crime (usually burglary or robbery) you can be charged with their first degree murder.

Apparently, this state has a 'Make My Day' law, which means you can shoot any intruder to smithereens with impunity.
Click to expand...


That's some fine straw mixed with excuse making.
 
Vixen said:
No, all they had was a knife and some brass knuckle dusters, according to early reports.
Click to expand...
None of which, of course, can cause death or grievous bodily harm. They were, I am certain, only brought along as fashion accessories...

Vixen said:
In the USA if your accomplices in a felony die, for whatever reason in the course of the crime (usually burglary or robbery) you can be charged with their first degree murder.
Click to expand...
Er, no. The underlying crime must be a felony and must also be the proximate cause of the death.

Vixen said:
Apparently, this state has a 'Make My Day' law, which means you can shoot any intruder to smithereens with impunity.
Click to expand...
This is called the Castle Doctrine. It does not mean what you say it means.
 
Vixen said:
It was 'found on the deceased person's body'. I recall one survey showed an enormous number of people carry a knife. It doesn't show intent to use it, except perhaps in self-defence.
Click to expand...

And if he'd had a gun then no doubt he was on his way to target practice after the home invasion. You're bending over backwards to try to excuse an armed home invasion here. I wonder if you'd feel the same if you looked up to find three people, one with a knife and one with brass knuckles, in your house?
 
Vixen said:
A young life is more important than grandma's silver candlesticks. Come on. Leave the crime solving to the police. Claim on your insurance.
Click to expand...

He wasn't solving the crime, he was a victim of it. He was there, when they broke in, armed, with nefarious intentions. It was certainly not his duty to interview them to determine if they were really going to cut his throat or not.
 
Metullus said:
None of which, of course, can cause death or grievous bodily harm. They were, I am certain, only brought along as fashion accessories...

Er, no. The underlying crime must be a felony and must also be the proximate cause of the death.

This is called the Castle Doctrine. It does not mean what you say it means.
Click to expand...

If say, all they showed him was a knife, then why not just shoot him in the hand? Give them a chance to get out. One fled to the lawn and died there.

If the homeowner's son shot them in anger, rather than self-defence, then he should be charged with manslaughter.

People can't walk around acting like Charles Bronson vigilantes.
 
I don't believe I've ever seen any post manage to be so wrong about everything before, even in the Politics section during an election year!
 
Vixen said:
That is the problem with the USA. It is an extremely violent country. And it's thanks in part to its gun culture.
Click to expand...

Remind me how many guns the Yorkshire Ripper used? Was it zero? It was zero. In fact if memory serves his first two victims were killed with rocks. Which you'd find to be innocent objects, because many people carry rocks with them.
 
Vixen said:
A young life is more important than grandma's silver candlesticks. Come on. Leave the crime solving to the police. Claim on your insurance.
Click to expand...

Need more information on actual value of specific candlesticks and young life in question before deciding.
 
Rocks are worse than knives. Knives only have the one dangerous edge, rocks are dangerous all the way around.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Remind me how many guns the Yorkshire Ripper used? Was it zero? It was zero. In fact if memory serves his first two victims were killed with rocks. Which you'd find to be innocent objects, because many people carry rocks with them.
Click to expand...

Logical fallacy = the non sequitur.

Sure you should be allowed to defend yourself and your family with appropriate force.

But you can't just kill someone just because they broke in. You have to show it was justified.

That's how it is in the UK, anyway.
 
Vixen said:
A young life is more important than grandma's silver candlesticks.
Click to expand...

You'd think so, but the home invaders decided to risk their lives for a little loot. We are left going with their own depreciated value for their own short lives. Was it suicide by burglary? I don't know. Maybe.
 
Vixen said:
Logical fallacy = the non sequitur.

Sure you should be allowed to defend yourself and your family with appropriate force.

But you can't just kill someone just because they broke in. You have to show it was justified.

That's how it is in the UK, anyway.
Click to expand...

The justification is that there's a bunch of armed people who broke into your house!

Seriously, what would you do in that situation? "Hi, you must be nice kids. You really want Grandma's candlesticks, huh? Okay, you can take them. Because I'm an enlightened special snowflake who values life!"

"Gosh, thanks, ma'am" the one with the knife replies, "but actually we're here for a rape and murder, then the candlesticks."

At that point I guess you'd ask them politely to not do those things?
 
Vixen said:
If say, all they showed him was a knife, then why not just shoot him in the hand?
Click to expand...
Well, for one thing, this is not television.

Vixen said:
Give them a chance to get out. One fled to the lawn and died there.
Click to expand...
If someone breaks into my home and threatens me with violence I owe them no consideration whatever.

Vixen said:
If the homeowner's son shot them in anger, rather than self-defence, then he should be charged with manslaughter.
Click to expand...
Do you have any reason to believe that the homeowner's son was not acting in self-defense other than your infatuation with the perpetrators? Moreover, is it your contention that it is not possible to be both fearful and angry at the same time?

Vixen said:
People can't walk around acting like Charles Bronson vigilantes.
Click to expand...
Defending oneself from assailants in one's home is not even close to walking around acting like Charles Bronson.
 
marplots said:
You'd think so, but the home invaders decided to risk their lives for a little loot. We are left going with their own depreciated value for their own short lives. Was it suicide by burglary? I don't know. Maybe.
Click to expand...

It's a tragedy all round. For the 23-year old who killed the three 17-year olds and the family and friends of the teenagers. The 21-year old obviously has a conscience, as she turned herself in and gave a full confession.

That's life without parole.

Four young lives ruined.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom