when self defense/home invasion turns into 1st degree murder

gym said:

He is obviously mentally ill.
If you can get past my dog, alarm, and other devices, then you are a dangerous person, and have killed my dog, "that's the only way she would stop. Once you do that, you are mine, I would have no problem dispatching anyone who entered my home while my family slept. Castle doctrine is my protection, and if not, oh well. I would first make every effort to make sure they were armed, and order them down on the ground, what happens next is on them. At indoor distances I only need one shot to remove someone's head with a 12 gauge. If they were not armed and got down, then fine, I call the police and they deal with it, but if they choose to try to rush me, or fast talk their way into a better position or to gain an advantage, they get shot. In that case a knee or leg would work just fine, if that didn't stop them then a second or third shot would.
I am not looking to kill anyone, but sometimes that is just a result of using a firearm.

Click to expand...

Gym....I would request that in the future you and everyone else posting this kind of chest thumping nonsense actually research more into the actual case before you post things like this. Listen to the audio. Read the case details.
I hope the results of this case are an eye opener.
This is a valuable lesson for everyone about what being a tough guy can buy you.

This bravado B.S. only makes us look bad, and harms you in the future if you are ever actually forced to defend yourself....and there is plenty more where that came from, from various THR members.

I saw a lot of this nonsense here and elsewhere, from people who were obviously ill informed as to the case details, the relevant laws pertaining to self defense in that location, or both.

You should go through the thousands of posts where members have been much more aggressive in their methods than anything I said. I spoke the truth If someone broke in and was armed, and failed to put down their weapon, after being warned, then they are asking to get shot. That's what you are supposed to do, after dispatching my dog. What would you do, since you are a critic?
I called police and if the guy has a gun are you going to talk him to death, I had this happen already, did you? It's not Bravado it's how things happen, we have guys in here who have said anyone who comes in my home gets shot, I have warned them about the perils of saying or doing anything like that.
But I an armed person comes in, and refuses to leave while harming my dog, and still holding a gun, do you want to make them a cup of hot tea?

^^
See post #112. And you are right, yours was not nearly as ridiculous as some.

Hey, its your legal defense if it ever comes down to it, and its your posts that are admissible in a court of law as evidence of your mindset concerning self defense. It just looks really cheesy when you and others come in here thumping your chests...then see you have to do a 180 in every subsequent post as the facts are brought to your attention.
Thats all.

Edit. so as not to clutter with another post...
But we weren't talking about an intruder breaking into your house, killing your dog, and holding your family at gunpoint, a situation that would certainly entitle you to use whatever means you felt necessary.
We are talking about....well....10 pages in and if you don't know....

Honestly, Gym.. I don't think you have any idea as to my abilities or willingness to use a firearm to defend myself. It is you who and others who have posted similarly to you whom I believe do not understand the situations in which you are allowed to use lethal force to defend yourself, either where you live, or where I do.
More people should be being called out for the B.S. they have posted on this thread, quiet frankly.

That's fine, an armed intruder who hurts or kills my dog and is holding a gun in my house, allows me to do whatever is necessary to stop the threat. I think after 44 years I know what I can and can't do. I would more than feel threatened with my family asleep and an armed man in my home, stop trying to sound all knowing. I have made that same point to guys who said anyone who comes in you can shoot, that is not true. Anyone who breaks in with a gun, and kills your dog disarms your alarm, and is holding a gun in your living room, is a different story. You want to wait till he shoots you or yours then that's up to you, personally I think you should rethink having a gun for self defense, if you don't know what self defense is.

Go to 224, I posted the audio link, after listening to it, I concluded and stated that the guy was definitely nuts, I don't know what else you are fishing for at this point

gym said:

Go to 224, I posted the audio link, after listening to it, I concluded and stated that the guy was definitely nuts, I don't know what else you are fishing for at this point

Click to expand...

see post #226.
Listening to the audio and viewing some case details BEFORE posting about kneecapping and shotgunning people would have been nice.
What do I want to see out of this discussion...in a nutshell? Restraint and maturity befitting The High Road. Less people jumping in with their random pointless posts about popping peoples heads with a shotgun, and more knowledgeable discussion about the thread topic.

He shot the girl several times coming down the stairs. Right or wrong, he could at least make a defense claiming self defense against an intruder that could be argued in court. But, after he shot her and she was laying on the floor wounded, unarmed and no threat to anyone. When he walked over to her, assessed her condition and made the choice to kill her, that's when he went beyond any argument of self defense and straight into murder.

Click to expand...

I think the man crossed the line when he arranged to have those kids enter a house they thought was empty with the sole purpose of killing them. And I'm amazed how many people refuse to see it.

I was just looking at the comments in the local Minnesota paper, they are about 50/50, as far as agreeing with the ruling. I think that this is only going to cause more problems with people who really don't know or don't car about what the law says. You are going to see many more people being shot by homeowners in the coming year, it's happening right now in FL. It's very dangerous and very tricky to expect people who just got fed up and refused to take it anymore, to follow rules when they start shooting.

Click to expand...

No. I don't think so. One court case, however high profile and sensational, isn't going to change anything about the actions of the very few people who find themselves facing intruders. The vase majority will continue just as they would have before -- shooting only when forced to (if then...) because that's generally what normal people do.

Seeing the predatory antics of one nut executing petty thieves in cold blood isn't going to make normal, good folks act the same way.

If anything, it will reiterate that your home is not your kingdom to rule absolutely, deciding life and death.

I was reading an article from Gabrial Suarez about this where he said that the average person is going to shoot a lot of bullets once they start shooting, which makes sense, if you have ever seen a police interview after a shooting, they almost never remember how many rounds they fired, and the gun is usually empty.

Click to expand...

Firing a lot of bullets in the moment of an attack is not the same thing as dragging someone into your basement and then executing them in cold blood. And conflating the two is sloppy, or disingenuous. Not having counted your shots in the heat of the moment is not the same as putting a coup de grace in a girl's brain as she lies gasping on your basement floor. So don't suggest that one conditions normal folks to do the other.

So if he was mentally deranged, should he have still been allowed to own a gun?

Click to expand...

Uhhh, say what? How does this enter the discussion?

And if you say yes, then how can you also say he was guilty?

Click to expand...

What the hell are you on about? YES, until he was adjudicated mentally deficient and/or guilty of a crime, he should be allowed to own a gun. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT HIS ACTIONS WEREN'T MURDEROUS.

Lots of people who are allowed to have guns and present no possible lawful reason for being involuntarily disarmed, go on to do terrible things. That's life.

We as a whole are against mental tests, "I know I am against any test", so is this just a consequence of an armed society?

Click to expand...

It's just a consequence of a HUMAN society.

It's nice to see you appointed yourself the post monitor. Silicosis Try and keep it to yourself, no one is telling you what you can or can't reference, why not try and do the same. You don't know me and I don't know you, so why don't you just worry about your own posts.
Fortunately no one but you cares about what you chose to cherry-pick in order to ingratiate yourself with "someone", or perhaps yourself. What I chose to say is my business, if you don't care for it, just ignore it, there is no need for you to try an show how in the know you are, it's called minding your business. All you will succeed in doing is closing down the discussion. What may be pointless to you may not be to others, again you have appointed your self the judge of what others say.

What may be pointless to you may not be to others, again you have appointed your self the judge of what others say.

Click to expand...

Damned straight. It's not hard to recognize utter ignorance - a willful ignorance - when ya' see it and it should be called out if it has the ability to affect us all.

Maybe I missed it in the posts, but he was convicted yesterday.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/minnesota-man-convicted-of-premeditated-murder

Sam you are taking this entirely too personal, I already said that after hearing the guys audio, that I agreed that he was guilty and that he was a bit crazy. The rest was just a possible consequence to this and other stories like this, where a homeowner has no ability to restrain themselves from going over the top with a firearm.
He is a murderer, but clearly he is insane also. If you listened to the audio, "about 20 minutes" it's clear that he is completely crazy.You have to admit that when something like this happens, "as tragic as it is" it's more fuel for the anti gun crowd.
And we have discussed many times the governments position on putting medical records online, and restricting people with mental conditions who sought treatment. I believe we can discuss a related topic without jeopardizing the original post as it is somewhat related. Perhaps his plea will be insanity , or temporary insanity. Am I too far off topic?
Didn't mean to upset you.

Want to read some real hate-filled willful ignorance concerning this case? Check out the first 10 posts of this article in the LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/nation/natio...tenced-20140429,0,1226782.story#axzz30Ip69uWX

Here's some real hate-filled nuggets of willful ignorance (from the first 10 posts!):

Well, if they were not criminals breaking into people's houses, they would still be alive today. Seems simple enough to me - don't be a house burglar....

Click to expand...

In Florida or Texas they would be throwing him a parade, and naming schools after him.

Click to expand...

Is the problem that old people are just supposed to take it? Criminals have more rights than landowners?
Warning... Don't keep a gun in the night stand... A bat buy the front door... That is premeditation... planing ahead to do injury...to a criminal.

Click to expand...

Supreme Court says Police can "Trick" People into committing crimes... They can "trick/lie" to get confessions: but a man can't protect his home...

Click to expand...

This is a horrible verdict, swayed by another over-zealous prosecutor that wanted a win, no matter the cost. Yet another low-information jury, unable to think for themselves. It makes one wonder just who made up this jury. Was it hoodlums and hoodlum parents on the jury? It sure as hell wasn't a jury full of responsible homeowners.

Click to expand...

Sound idea, poor execution. He should have just grievously wounded them (and not taped it).

Click to expand...

Law needs to be re-written....

Click to expand...

I swear...I believe we got a mental illness problem in this country.

gym said:

Well he must have told someone or how did they know he laid in wait? Did he confess to waiting there to kill them, if so then he's dumber than wood?

Click to expand...

This was my question. See, for example, post #204 where I wrote:

Black Butte said:

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact. Unless the defendant explicitly tells you the reason for moving the truck, you must draw an inference as to why he moved the truck. My point is that we must be careful in drawing inferences from circumstantial evidence when different interpretations are plausible.

Click to expand...

Bill that's exactly what I was eluding to in the post above yours. This was very bad for the pro gun people I am sure it will be used or referenced by our fearless leader, it was a bad hit for all of us. The more incidents like this that occur, the less likely the anti gun groups are to lay off. It shows irresponsibility on the part of the homeowner and these people who say things referenced to in your post.
Especially the Stand your ground law which they have been after since Jeb Bush signed it down here in the sunshine state.

Sam you are taking this entirely too personal

Click to expand...

I'm not taking this personally, except as part of my job to help shepherd our threads here to be purposeful, helpful, and relatively focused. At this point I'm just trying to follow the bouncing ball of odd random thoughts and answer them as best as we're able.

I already said that after hearing the guys audio, that I agreed that he was guilty and that he was a bit crazy. The rest was just a possible consequence to this and other stories like this, where a homeowner has no ability to restrain themselves from going over the top with a firearm

Click to expand...

And I disagreed that this trial will be some harbinger of bad behavior from "homeowners in the coming year." There is no realistic way that there are "consequences to this" that involve other people setting traps and murdering anyone. That's simply a bizarre leap of logic.

He is a murderer, but clearly he is insane also. If you listened to the audio, "about 20 minutes" it's clear that he is completely crazy.You have to admit that when something like this happens, "as tragic as it is" it's more fuel for the anti gun crowd.

Click to expand...

Only in that ANY killing is fuel for the anti-gun crowd. The antis aren't going to go hold any million-mom candle lit vigils over two housebreaking thieves who bumbled into getting killed by a psychopath.

And we have discussed many times the governments position on putting medical records online, and restricting people with mental conditions who sought treatment. I believe we can discuss a related topic without jeopardizing the original post as it is somewhat related.... Am I too far off topic?

Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence that he'd ever sought treatment for mental illness or had any medical records of that nature which could be put on line? If not, then YES, this is going way the heck off target.

Perhaps his plea will be insanity , or temporary insanity.

Click to expand...

His plea will be...? The trial is OVER. His pleading is done.

Didn't mean to upset you.

Click to expand...

Focus, my friend. Focus.

Bill that's exactly what I was eluding to in the post above yours. This was very bad for the pro gun people I am sure it will be used or referenced by our fearless leader, it was a bad hit for all of us. The more incidents like this that occur, the less likely the anti gun groups are to lay off. It shows irresponsibility on the part of the homeowner and these people who say things referenced to in your post.
Especially the Stand your ground law which they have been after since Jeb Bush signed it down here in the sunshine state.

Click to expand...

A mean, <deleted>, crazy guy with a gun....is just an aberration. So...I don't go around in life worrying too much about his type, and I don't think I'm alone. Hell...most people who I know who are self-professed Liberals own guns for self defense and understand anomalies like Byron Smith when they see them.

However, what disturbs many people of any political leaning is when the actions of a Byron Smith are defended or even justified, because we are just screwed as a society if this attitude is accepted and becomes the norm.

That is what is upsetting me so much.

Want to read some real hate-filled willful ignorance concerning this case?

Click to expand...

Bill, I don't think you need to read "hate filled" and "willful" ignorance into most of those comments. Just general garden-variety ignorance will answer for them fine.

As I said before, the average American -- especially the average "red blooded conservative American homeowner" -- really has no idea how the laws of self defense really work, and has a grossly distorted, knee-jerk view of his rights and duties in defending his home and stuff.

Me said:

It isn't a simple issue, especially in that it goes counter-intuitively to what I think most Americans believe about one's right to property and self-defense. We have an ingrained aesthetic that says, if you violate the sanctity of "me and mine" you are subject to whatever hellfire and brimstone I'm willing and able to bring down on you.

Hence the popularity of those droll faux warning signs like, "If you're found here tonight, you'll be found here tomorrow!", and "Nothing in here is worth your life..." -- all of which rather baldly suggest the message that the owner feels within his rights to kill someone for intruding and/or theft.

Too many John Wayne movies where the "law of the old west" says the good guy can hang the bad guy for suspicion of cattle rustling, or old action dramas with the good guy yelling after a fleeing burglar, "STOP or I'll SHOOT!" and then firing a warning shot or two.

That sort of thing has built and reinforced a really distorted view of self defense, home defense, and the law.

Click to expand...

So when you present him with a case like this, he's really at sea trying to make sense of how someone who'd affronted the "defender" has any rights at all, and how the "defender's" rights don't include any toll he wishes to exact, including taking lives in a decided, willful manner.

...

Heck, you're pretty new here. You should read some of our threads on trespassing and why a trespasser could actually shoot a homeowner on their own property and be justified in self-defense. Some folks' heads near about explode trying to grasp these concepts, as the real function of self-defense law is utterly foreign to most.

I didn't say or mean that other homeowners would do exactly what he did, only that now it will be more scrutinized

It's not the act itself, just the perception that he gunned down two innocent kids

He doesn't have to have sought mental heath treatment, this will only bring that argument back to the surface again.

I meant in the case where he get's a mistrial, or the judge sets aside the verdict after closer examination of the guilty party, it's rare but happens, also on appeal they can claim he was insane.
from now on I will fully explain everything I elude to

Bill, I don't think you need to read "hate filled" and "willful" ignorance into most of those comments. Just general garden-variety ignorance will answer for them fine.

Click to expand...

Sam,

I'll respectfully disagree. I think we have an epidemic of hate in this country and it's independant of any political leaning. I mean, we imprison a higher proportion of our people than any other country on earth....ANY. In fact, we have about 25% of the world's prison population. We are not a very nice people.