Mute Air Force Veteran with advanced Alzheimer's murdered after ringing doorbell: Stand Your Ground - Polidicks

[url]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/12/02/3007571/elderly-man-alzheimers-shot-dead-wandering-residents-property/[/url] [url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2514803/Man-Alzheimers-shot-homeowner-ringing-doorbell.html[/url] [QUOTE]A 72-year-old man with advanced Alzheimer's has been shot dead by a homeowner after he rang the bell at the stranger's house when he became lost and confused in the middle of the night. Ronald Westbrook rang the doorbell of a home at 4am on Wednesday after wandering around in the dark for almost four hours in rural Walker County, Georgia. He had walked around three miles from his home by the time he approached the door. The shooter was identified as Joe Hendrix, of Chattanooga, Tennessee, according to Sheriff Steve Wilson said. Mr Westbrook rang the door bell and turned the door handle of the home in the new development where Hendrix had just moved in with his fiancée. The woman, who has not been identified, called 911 and was on the phone with a dispatcher when Hendrix confronted the elderly man in the yard with a 40-caliber handgun Mr Westbrook, an Air Force veteran, did not respond to the commands that Hendrix issued to him because Alzheimer's Disease has left the72-year-old practically mute. Hendrix fired four shots with one bullet striking Mr Westbrook in the chest and killing him. [/QUOTE] Perhaps these laws should change at this point.

Alzheimer's is a horrible disease. If I ever get Alzheimer's, you can shoot me too.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43066607][url]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/12/02/3007571/elderly-man-alzheimers-shot-dead-wandering-residents-property/[/url] [url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2514803/Man-Alzheimers-shot-homeowner-ringing-doorbell.html[/url] Perhaps these laws should change at this point.[/QUOTE] No, they really shouldn't. This isn't protected under stand your ground laws. The shooter left the dwelling to confront the guy, who merely refused commands, but made no aggressive maneuvers. No forcible entry or anything of the sort. It is plainly illegal. The idea that it might not be prosecuted is purely speculation. Stand your ground is precisely what it sounds like. If someone threatens you, and a reasonable person would perceive it as a valid and IMMINENT threat of serious bodily harm (like s/he has a weapon and has it in hand) you do not have to first attempt to flee provided you have a legal right to be where you are. Since turning your back to an assailant can easily result in your death, it removes your requirement to do so.

If you thought someone was enough of a threat to call the cops and load your gun, why on earth would you go outside to confront them?

Horrible situation. I have to imagine the guy wouldn't shoot a clearly confused old man, it says he was shot in the yard, maybe he couldn't see him or something?

While it was stupid of the guy to kill him, I kind of understand what was going through his head. It's a bit freaky to have some guy turning your doorknob in the middle of the night and then not saying a word. Doesn't particularly justify the murder though.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;43066650]If you thought someone was enough of a threat to call the cops and load your gun, why on earth would you go outside to confront them?[/QUOTE] He shouldn't have, it was essentially an unjustified shooting, no way around it.

what the fuck is with these guys murdering old people because they think they are a threat? this is like the 4 the person in a month to claim castle doctrine and cold blood murder someone for fucks sake people, the doorbell is to inform you people are at your door not that they are going to kick it in and murder you

[QUOTE=GunFox;43066645]No, they really shouldn't. This isn't protected under stand your ground laws. The shooter left the dwelling to confront the guy, who merely refused commands[/QUOTE] He could be considered an imminent threat apparently. Even if that doesn't get them it could go under castle doctrine. [QUOTE] It is not clear whether Georgia defines the “dwelling” to include the property surrounding the home such as the porch and yard, as in some other states.[/QUOTE]

Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.

[QUOTE=certified;43066690]Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.[/QUOTE] Who rings a doorbell to rob someone?

This would obviously not happen in Europe.

I was gonna say that "maybe the shooter felt he was threatened, it's not like people are psychic and know when someone has an issue that prevents them from heeding to warnings blah blah etc. its a traumatic misunderstanding" but then I read that he went outside and actively confronted while the old guy wasn't being threatening at all. That's not right at all. It's still hard to make a proper judgement, though... It was late at night, who rings your doorbell late at night? And it's dark, who's to say the shooter wasn't seeing the old guy properly and thought he was up to no good? There are crimes involving old people using their charming old age to fool people and rob them, you know. I'm not saying whether the shooter was in the right or wrong. There's too much missing information and evidence to make a proper judgement, I can't even form an opinion myself.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43066682]He could be considered an imminent threat apparently. Even if that doesn't get them it could go under castle doctrine.[/QUOTE] Stand your ground applies to anywhere you have a legal right to be. Castle doctrine is the only one that has to specify a place. However CONFRONTING PEOPLE who aren't an active threat, or likely to be an active threat, isn't generally okay.

[QUOTE=certified;43066690]Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.[/QUOTE] Too bad. If your first reaction to a confusing situation is to shoot someone then you're a paranoid asshole who should not have a weapon.

[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;43066704]Who rings a doorbell to rob someone?[/QUOTE] More than you think. Here's a story from a month ago. [URL]http://www.wwaytv3.com/2013/10/25/police-search-for-masked-men-who-rang-doorbell-robbed-homeowners[/URL]

[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;43066704]Who rings a doorbell to rob someone?[/QUOTE] The same kind of robber dumb enough to brag on Facebook afterward.

[QUOTE=certified;43066690]Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.[/QUOTE] Yes. Yes I can blame the shooter. Confronting and shooting an unarmed old man in his yard is fucking ridiculous. Bullshit about how it was dark doesn't fly. Anyone with a gun should know you keep a flashlight fucking next to it. Run into a dark fucking yard without a light source and shoot what you find there? You deserve to go to prison.

[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;43066704]Who rings a doorbell to rob someone?[/QUOTE] Who confuses a 72 years old mute senile with Alzheimer with an agressive robber that NEEDS to be shot???

Jesus Christ those sources

[QUOTE=certified;43066725]The same kind of robber dumb enough to brag on Facebook afterward.[/QUOTE] So this begs the question: if someone rings your doorbell at night and you're unsure of their intentions, are you justified in shooting them?

[QUOTE=certified;43066690]Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.[/QUOTE] They were acting suspiciously, yeah, but they weren't doing doing anything threatening. You can't respond with lethal force against someone acting strangely.

[QUOTE=Explosions;43066735]So this begs the question: if someone rings your doorbell at night and you're unsure of their intentions, are you justified in shooting them?[/QUOTE] No, because you have no idea if they're a threat, you can't just empty a gun at a noise in the bushes to make sure.

[QUOTE=Explosions;43066735]So this begs the question: if someone rings your doorbell at night and you're unsure of their intentions, are you justified in shooting them?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't of been as dumb to leave the door open.

[QUOTE=Explosions;43066735]So this begs the question: if someone rings your doorbell at night and you're unsure of their intentions, are you justified in shooting them?[/QUOTE] I'd argue that you're justified in opening the door with a weapon in hand, but certainly not in shooting them. At least, not if they've not made a move on you.

[QUOTE=certified;43066690]Can you blame the shooter though? Most people don't go randomly ringing doorbells at 4 in the morning, and someone acting weird and uncooperative like someone with advanced Alzheimers is bound to be mistaken for a criminal or a drunk about to do something criminal. Note that the shooter was either overtired or hastily woken up and had a hard time properly identifying the victim in a confused and disoriented wakeup. That, and the wife was already calling 911, so the thought that the ringer might attack or rob them was clearly in their minds already.[/QUOTE] He should've shot his wife, too. [I]Just in case.[/I]

How about this: If you ring someone's doorbell in the middle of the night needing help and they come out screaming and waving a gun in your face, would you be justified pulling a concealed gun out and shooting them dead in their own doorway since they are an immediate threat to you? What if both people shot each other and survived? Would they both be protected by stand your ground because they both genuinely saw each other as a threat?

I'm just wondering why the guy just didn't let the 911 go through and wait for police to arrive. Only way it would be justified is if the old guy was trying to break in forcefully and succeed, but as far as I can tell, he wasn't. I don't know why, but I feel like there's something missing from all this.

[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;43066781]I'd argue that you're justified in opening the door with a weapon in hand, but certainly not in shooting them. At least, not if they've not made a move on you.[/QUOTE] In this case its 10 minutes later and the "intruder" is standing around on the law.

generally when someone rings my doorbell at 4 am its because they need help not that they want to rob me...