Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
So now they were drugged up AND stupid?
Likely. Criminals are usually straight edge, are they? And obviously they were stupid, hence why they broke into someone's house and then charged a guy with a gun.
You can play this game all you want, fact is, he's innocent until proven guilty. Burden of proof is on you if you're going to say that he went out and just started shooting without being provoked. It's his word vs no one's word, his word by default wins.
Originally posted by BackFire
Likely. Criminals are usually straight edge, are they? And obviously they were stupid, hence why they broke into someone's house and then charged a guy with a gun.You can play this game all you want, fact is, he's innocent until proven guilty. Burden of proof is on you if you're going to say that he went out and just started shooting without being provoked. It's his word vs no one's word, his word by default wins.
do you think the man is justified, after being told not to exit the house by a police officer, if it is true they charged him? Why aren't the people who had the gun drawn on them by another civilian, not a peace officer, able to defend themselves? Its not like he was making a citizen's arrest
Originally posted by BackFireI LOVED you in Death Wish. haermm
Likely. Criminals are usually straight edge, are they? And obviously they were stupid, hence why they broke into someone's house and then charged a guy with a gun.You can play this game all you want, fact is, he's innocent until proven guilty. Burden of proof is on you if you're going to say that he went out and just started shooting without being provoked. It's his word vs no one's word, his word by default wins.
Originally posted by inimalist
Its not like he was making a citizen's arrest
Just out of curiousity, does anyone know how to make a citizen's arrest?
Originally posted by inimalistthats sweet though man, I have a similar thing with my GF, we only see each other for a couple of days and it is mind blowing when we do
I just dropped her off at the airport... Sigh, had to keep my man face on... 🤪
Originally posted by BackFire
Likely. Criminals are usually straight edge, are they?
Dudes is always doing crazy shit on the stock market. It's possible 😉
Originally posted by chithappens
Just out of curiousity, does anyone know how to make a citizen's arrest?
oh, trying to remember from highschool law...
in Canada at least: You have to own the property, be given the right by the owner of the property, or maybe on public grounds. Then, just declare "you are under citizen's arrest" I think.
Originally posted by chithappens
I just dropped her off at the airport... Sigh, had to keep my man face on... 🤪
**** man, how far away does she live? Got any plans to move in with her or anything? You the man!
Originally posted by chithappens
Dudes is always doing crazy shit on the stock market. It's possible 😉
i see what you did there
Originally posted by inimalist
do you think the man is justified, after being told not to exit the house by a police officer, if it is true they charged him? Why aren't the people who had the gun drawn on them by another civilian, not a peace officer, able to defend themselves? Its not like he was making a citizen's arrest
As said, leaving the house was a mistake, one that the man freely admits to. That part isn't justifiable, he shouldn't have done that.
But he did, and if it's true that one of the guys charged him after he had his gun pointed at them and told them not to move, then shooting them is justifiable, as at that point it becomes self defense. Had they not charged him, he likely wouldn't have shot. They charged him, in response, he shot them.
And you present these two thugs as if they're some kind of normal citizens. Like they were just walking down the street and the guy pulled a gun on them and told them to freeze. They were CRIMINALS, for all he knew, DANGEROUS criminals. They had just broken into his neighbors house, and for all he knew, they just murdered his neighbors. He went out and held a gun on them so they wouldn't flee and get away with what they did. He's completely justified in holding a gun to a couple of criminals so that they get arrested. The fact that they're criminals remove their right to defend themselves against a man who was scared for his own safety and defending the possibility that they might go after his house next.
Originally posted by inimalist
oh, trying to remember from highschool law...in Canada at least: You have to own the property, be given the right by the owner of the property, or maybe on public grounds. Then, just declare "you are under citizen's arrest" I think.
I have NEVER seen this happen. It's weird because I know about it but no one is actually bold enough to do it because "criminals" scare people, even if the criminals are vastly outnumbered.
Originally posted by inimalist**** man, how far away does she live? Got any plans to move in with her or anything? You the man!
8 hour drive, 90 min flight from home.
When I go to school it's a 150 min drive and it's not even worth it to fly. We been together only about 6 weeks or so but I take her very seriously, hence my sig right now.
Originally posted by inimalisti see what you did there
😆 I honestly find it funny you can attempt to steal tens of millions of dollars and you get "imprisonment" in a luxury jail house for 18 months with about 6 months house arrest. Compare that to all the mandatory years that go into robbing a bank for far less money and it all begins to look weird. It must be because they were putting lives in danger! 😆
Originally posted by BackFire
As said, leaving the house was a mistake, one that the man freely admits to. That part isn't justifiable, he shouldn't have done that.But he did, and if it's true that one of the guys charged him after he had his gun pointed at them and told them not to move, then shooting them is justifiable, as at that point it becomes self defense. Had they not charged him, he likely wouldn't have shot. They charged him, in response, he shot them.
And you present these two thugs as if they're some kind of normal citizens. Like they were just walking down the street and the guy pulled a gun on them and told them to freeze. They were CRIMINALS, for all he knew, DANGEROUS criminals. They had just broken into his neighbors house, and for all he knew, they just murdered his neighbors. He went out and held a gun on them so they wouldn't flee and get away with what they did. He's completely justified in holding a gun to a couple of criminals so that they get arrested. The fact that they're criminals remove their right to defend themselves against a man who was scared for his own safety and defending the possibility that they might go after his house next.
I agree with all of this. (someone is going to nag something stupid anyway 🤣 )
Originally posted by BackFire
As said, leaving the house was a mistake, one that the man freely admits to. That part isn't justifiable, he shouldn't have done that.But he did, and if it's true that one of the guys charged him after he had his gun pointed at them and told them not to move, then shooting them is justifiable, as at that point it becomes self defense. Had they not charged him, he likely wouldn't have shot. They charged him, in response, he shot them.
And you present these two thugs as if they're some kind of normal citizens. Like they were just walking down the street and the guy pulled a gun on them and told them to freeze. They were CRIMINALS, for all he knew, DANGEROUS criminals. They had just broken into his neighbors house, and for all he knew, they just murdered his neighbors. He went out and held a gun on them so they wouldn't flee and get away with what they did. He's completely justified in holding a gun to a couple of criminals so that they get arrested. The fact that they're criminals remove their right to defend themselves against a man who was scared for his own safety and defending the possibility that they might go after his house next.
actually, I think we are thinking along the same lines...
though, I might argue that the warnings from the police officer that he may have been... negligent? He should be open to civil action from both families, and the one who didn't charge him should probably have pretty solid grounds.
The one that didn't charge him certainly may have a case. But obviously by the time he shot that one the situation had already exploded, plus the guy was running away. The guy's mind was probably going crazy with all the adrenaline flowing through him at that point, so I think most people would give him the benefit of the doubt. And he would probably be able to do a 'temporary insanity' kinda thing.
Originally posted by chithappens
I have NEVER seen this happen. It's weird because I know about it but no one is actually bold enough to do it because "criminals" scare people, even if the criminals are vastly outnumbered.
my buddy did it once when some kids stole something from the store he was working at, but the kids had stashed the goods
Originally posted by chithappens
8 hour drive, 90 min flight from home.When I go to school it's a 150 min drive and it's not even worth it to fly. We been together only about 6 weeks or so but I take her very seriously, hence my sig right now.
congrats man, she sounds awesome, and I got a smile when I read her quote
Originally posted by chithappens
😆 I honestly find it funny you can attempt to steal tens of millions of dollars and you get "imprisonment" in a luxury jail house for 18 months with about 6 months house arrest. Compare that to all the mandatory years that go into robbing a bank for far less money and it all begins to look weird. It must be because they were putting lives in danger! 😆
I totally agree on that one. Defrauding thousands of people out of their pensions or corrupt trading is almost just what is expected. Its like the interview in Bowling for Columbine with the COPS guy. If they could get the CEO to run down the street topless, cracked out, and throwing their cell phone, people would be all for it.
Originally posted by BackFire
The one that didn't charge him certainly may have a case. But obviously by the time he shot that one the situation had already exploded, plus the guy was running away. The guy's mind was probably going crazy with all the adrenaline flowing through him at that point, so I think most people would give him the benefit of the doubt. And he would probably be able to do a 'temporary insanity' kinda thing.
we don't have temporary insanity up here
and, there is precedence, at least in Canada, that shooting a fleeing individual is not covered by law.
Originally posted by inimalist
my buddy did it once when some kids stole something from the store he was working at, but the kids had stashed the goods
Wow, that takes guts. Americans are pussies 😆
Originally posted by inimalist
congrats man, she sounds awesome, and I got a smile when I read her quote
Yeah, she is great. Stubborn, but I need a little bit of that in my life. If my lady can't stand up for herself it would never work.
Speaking of sigs, I'm glad you got read of that Lil Wayne... he is a complete lame ass 😮💨
Originally posted by inimalistI totally agree on that one. Defrauding thousands of people out of their pensions or corrupt trading is almost just what is expected. Its like the interview in Bowling for Columbine with the COPS guy. If they could get the CEO to run down the street topless, cracked out, and throwing their cell phone, people would be all for it.
I can't understand the laws sometimes. The most heinous crimes (by this I mean in a utilitarian manner) have the least punishment in a lot of cases.
Originally posted by BackFire
The one that didn't charge him certainly may have a case. But obviously by the time he shot that one the situation had already exploded, plus the guy was running away. The guy's mind was probably going crazy with all the adrenaline flowing through him at that point, so I think most people would give him the benefit of the doubt. And he would probably be able to do a 'temporary insanity' kinda thing.
I don't think temporary insanity is necessary for his case. The assumption people are making in going against the guy is that a lot of others will follow suit and start shooting all robbers, but truthfully if a man runs at me I'm blowing his brain off. That simple. I'm not advocating killing when it is not necessary but this is not like a videogame where you aim at certain areas to wound; kill or be killed, no time to negotiate.
If anything, people should be more concerned about criminal activity itself and why people reach that point so it is not so prevelant.
Hero?
No.
Racist? Possibly. My bet would be that this gentleman harbors a slight racism towards the large influx/multiplication of the Latino peoples. 61 year old white male is trigger happy with a "minority"? Yeah, racism probably had a little bit to do with it. Again, "probably". There is the slight possibility ("listening" to the voice of reason, a la Roland) that racism had nothing to do with this.
I would consider him a hero if he beat the shit out of them when they entered his home or his neighbors home and the neighbors were home, or something similar. At 61 years old, you'd have to be a badass to be able to be able to do something like that. However, I would only consider it brave and heroic IF people were home at his neighbors residence or his own home. If I remember the audio clip, his neighbor was NOT home. If he walked over there and beat them senseless, knowing full well that his neighbors weren't home, then that would be unnecessary and morally wrong, imo.
In the end, he should of just waited on the police and used that shotgun only if they entered his premises. I'd be scared shitless myself partly because I don't want to kill someone and partly because I don't want to die...so yeah, I'd be trigger happy as well.
Originally posted by chithappens
Yeah, she is great. Stubborn, but I need a little bit of that in my life. If my lady can't stand up for herself it would never work.
yes, women need a strong backbone. I think my girlfriend is the cutest when she gets really angry at something on TV or whatever because it offends her feminist sensibilities. lol, that and I'm pretty strong willed also, so it'd be lame as hell if she didn't put up a fight.
Originally posted by chithappens
Speaking of sigs, I'm glad you got read of that Lil Wayne... he is a complete lame ass 😮💨
lol, no, i hear that. Lollipop has a good beat, and the lyrics were actually kanye, so I didn't feel to bad about it.
its no "love in this club", granted
Originally posted by chithappens
I can't understand the laws sometimes. The most heinous crimes (by this I mean in a utilitarian manner) have the least punishment in a lot of cases.
the people whose lives that are destroyed in lost pensions and stock fraud get almost no justice. Multi billionaires spend, like you said, so little time in jail, whereas, god help you if you are a black guy caught selling meth.
I'll even give you that meth ruins lives. So any meth dealer, could have caused some serious misery, but nothing compared to millions of dollars removed from the expected income of workers or in the individuals bankrupted when investments go bust over fraud.
lol, I'm all for a war on corporate stock fraud
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
How do you shoot someone in the SIDE if they are "charging" you? Do the laws of physics like not apply to the shooter's yard?
When he saw the barrel of the shotgun as he was facing the guy, I'm guessing he had a profound "Oh shit!" moment. He then hit the breaks in an attempt to get the hell outta Dodge, but by then it was too late because the buckshot had already found its mark. He got hit as he was turning.