Getaway driver arrested for murder.

Vixen said:
No, this is what a poster told me, when I suggested pointing your gun and shouting FREEZE - PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD - YOU HAVE THREE SECONDS TO GET OUT.

We don't have a gun culture in the UK and most burglars are highly nervous and keen to leg it with their spoils as fast as possible. The majority do NOT want to be confronted with the homeowner. It is surely safer for the homeowner to just let them flee.
Click to expand...

That might be the more prudent decision, but I don't begrudge a homeowner who, in the heat of the moment, chooses the more violent alternative. I think that his choice is perfectly reasonable, perhaps not one we would make in calm daylight, but that's not the situation in which he finds himself. He's more or less literally besieged. His home has been invaded and he's in no position to wonder whether these are good li'l burglars, only intending to take mere property, or more nefarious folk.

As it turns out, these particular folk were armed. I'm not certain whether the homeowner knew this before opening fire -- this is something that only he might know. Had they not been armed, I'd still think his response reasonable. I don't think he had a responsibility to invite them to leave. In the heat of the moment, he honestly doesn't know whether there's a fourth person elsewhere in the home and he isn't secure in his position.
 
Vixen said:
No, this is what a poster told me, when I suggested pointing your gun and shouting FREEZE - PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD - YOU HAVE THREE SECONDS TO GET OUT.

We don't have a gun culture in the UK and most burglars are highly nervous and keen to leg it with their spoils as fast as possible. The majority do NOT want to be confronted with the homeowner. It is surely safer for the homeowner to just let them flee.
Click to expand...

If they didn't want to confront a homeowner, they could just target unoccupied houses. And if they make a mistake, and a homeowner is present, they can flee immediately- no need to wait for the homeowner to ask them to.
 
phiwum said:
You know, I disagree with Vixen here, but I'll give her this. She does sound really, really British.

I don't happen to own any guns, despite my Okie heritage, but I think that expecting the worst from masked men breaking into my house is quite reasonable, and that this reasonable expectation justifies a violent reaction.

Still, inviting them to leave is mighty British, at least as far as my prejudices go. (I get these prejudices from BBC4, so they're quite accurate I'm sure.)
Click to expand...

If the British were all or mostly like Vixen they wouldn't be British, they'd have been German for the last eighty years.
 
Giz said:
If they didn't want to confront a homeowner, they could just target unoccupied houses. And if they make a mistake, and a homeowner is present, they can flee immediately- no need to wait for the homeowner to ask them to.
Click to expand...
Precisely. If burglars don't turn tail and run the instant they know someone else in the house and awake, their intentions can (and probably should) be presumed to be violent. Besides, why else would burglars operate in a pack of three (plus driver) like this? Starting from the assumption that they wouldn't be violent seems insane.
 
Babbylonian said:
Precisely. If burglars don't turn tail and run the instant they know someone else in the house and awake, their intentions can (and probably should) be presumed to be violent. Besides, why else would burglars operate in a pack of three (plus driver) like this? Starting from the assumption that they wouldn't be violent seems insane.
Click to expand...

Right. And it's not even a pack of three. It's an armed pack of three. Assuming that they might be violent is not only reasonable but sensible.
 
Vixen said:
No, this is what a poster told me, when I suggested pointing your gun and shouting FREEZE - PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD - YOU HAVE THREE SECONDS TO GET OUT.

We don't have a gun culture in the UK and most burglars are highly nervous and keen to leg it with their spoils as fast as possible. The majority do NOT want to be confronted with the homeowner. It is surely safer for the homeowner to just let them flee.
Click to expand...
So, British thieves are pansies?

This signature is intended to irritate people.
 
phiwum said:
First, we shouldn't take anyone's account hearing a particular number of shots too seriously. You and I are really not well-trained for that.

Second, whether or not the fifteen-year-old is brought on similar charges is a matter for the prosecutor. He might think that charity suggests otherwise, or he might think that he has a thin case to show she was involved, or it might be some combination of each of these considerations.

Honestly, I'd be fine with dropping the charge for the driver, or at least lessening the offense. That's a whole other ball of wax from your main argument, that a homeowner ought to ask if someone who's broken into his home needs help and invite him to leave. That, I think, is the nigh universal point of contention with your claim.
Click to expand...


I strongly disagree with this. The driver rightly deserves to be charged with murder. Her behaviour is disgraceful, inexcusable and recklessly anti-social.

However, if having challenged the three and they move to bring out a weapon, then sure, shooting them is a reasonable option. If he shot them because he was irked and wanted to teach them a lesson, then he should face manslaughter charges.
 
Beady said:
To repeat: When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Another saying we have here: I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

This signature is intended to irritate people.
Click to expand...

Embiggened and Colored for easy reading and for truth!!!!!!
 
phiwum said:
That might be the more prudent decision, but I don't begrudge a homeowner who, in the heat of the moment, chooses the more violent alternative. I think that his choice is perfectly reasonable, perhaps not one we would make in calm daylight, but that's not the situation in which he finds himself. He's more or less literally besieged. His home has been invaded and he's in no position to wonder whether these are good li'l burglars, only intending to take mere property, or more nefarious folk.

As it turns out, these particular folk were armed. I'm not certain whether the homeowner knew this before opening fire -- this is something that only he might know. Had they not been armed, I'd still think his response reasonable. I don't think he had a responsibility to invite them to leave. In the heat of the moment, he honestly doesn't know whether there's a fourth person elsewhere in the home and he isn't secure in his position.
Click to expand...
I have described in the past why I like the interior design of my house. It eliminates certain design flaws in so many that aid an assaulter!!!!! Mine aids me!!! And funnels assaulters in my direction.
 
Vixen said:
If he shot them because he was irked and wanted to teach them a lesson, then he should face manslaughter charges.
Click to expand...
"Irked?" Your persistence in using the most mild descriptors of an extreme situation makes me think that either a) multiple people breaking into your home is something that has happened more than once with no negative consequences or b) you have virtually no empathy for someone who's home has been invaded.

Either way, your arguments continue to be a bit underwhelming...sorry, I mean ridiculous.
 
Vixen said:
I strongly disagree with this. The driver rightly deserves to be charged with murder. Her behaviour is disgraceful, inexcusable and recklessly anti-social.

However, if having challenged the three and they move to bring out a weapon, then sure, shooting them is a reasonable option. If he shot them because he was irked and wanted to teach them a lesson, then he should face manslaughter charges.
Click to expand...
One is not merely irked when others break into his home. He is reasonably concerned for his life.

It might be different in the UK, where guns are less common, but Oklahoma is not in the UK, and so we have different notions if reasonable fear.

We could, of course, debate whether the Second Amendment is a good idea, but it was the law of the land when this took place. And in that context, the homeowner's action was understandable.
 
Vixen said:
We beat the Boche because we do have True Grit.
Click to expand...

We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall ask-you-to-leave on the beaches, we shall ask-you-to-leave on the landing grounds, we shall ask-you-to-leave in the fields and in the streets, we shall ask-you-to-leave in the hills; we shall never stop giving the benefit of the doubt.

From Churchill's speech "Maybe they thought France was empty, but we shall ask them to leave"
 
phiwum said:
We could, of course, debate whether the Second Amendment is a good idea, but it was the law of the land when this took place. And in that context, the homeowner's action was understandable.
Click to expand...
And, again, rifles/shotguns in homes are not unique to the US, nor is the concept of defending one's home and, more importantly, one's person with deadly force.

I decided a long time ago that I would consider no possession so dear that I would defend it with deadly force, but I would consider three people breaking into my home to be an imminent threat to my survival and I can certainly imagine using deadly force in that case, assuming I was capable of exerting said force without significant additional risk to myself (read: if I considered running a bad option).
 
Running away - as the legally armed person- tends to invite being back shot!!! Some may remember that for states where they do not have castle doctrine, the safest action is to slowly back to a point where you are clearly not able to get away and then blow the attackers away as you could not retreat any further. It's like the police suggestion that if you nail one at the door, make sure part of the body is in the house. Check all such with your states laws - especially silly places who act as if criminals should have more rights than the citizens they are supposed to protect. And I am looking heavily at the West coast, New York and New Jersey!!!!!!!
 
Vixen said:
No, this is what a poster told me, when I suggested pointing your gun and shouting FREEZE - PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD - YOU HAVE THREE SECONDS TO GET OUT.
Click to expand...

No. You forgot the line you put in after that where you said:

Fire a few shots above their heads and watch how fast they get down that driveway.
Click to expand...

And a poster responded:

Warning shots will likely get the homeowner arrested.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom