Man 'on neighborhood watch' kills 20-year-old outside home
60 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;50865894]Literally never because your shot will come back down. I recall hearing about people being killed by bullets falling from someone firing off a gun in to the air from miles away.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't air friction slow down bullet though?
Though bullets are designed to have least friction..
Firing a warning shot could be evidence used by the prosecution to prove you didn't feel your life was in immediate danger.
This is why you don't fire warning shots.
There's not much info on this yet, but apparently there was a large party two houses down. He apparently fired the shot from [i]inside his home[/i], breaking a window, and killing a man who was [i]in front of the mailbox[/i] by his home. In the street - not even on his property.
He gave a "warning shot" to some guys two houses down from a house party they were attending, killing him in the street. If he was on the guys' property, maybe there'd be an argument - but he was on the street in front of his property. There's no stand your ground law in the entire country that lets you take potshots at people on the street in front of your home.
This guy seems like a total nutcase. "There's some frigging black males outside my frigging house with firearms," even though he [I]knows[/I] there's a party two houses down, [i]nobody[/i] even engaged with him or instigated violence, and the one person he killed [i]wasn't even on his fucking property[/i].
Sorry, dude, but even if there are 20 black men outside your house camping out in the middle of the road, you can't fucking [i]shoot them[/i]. You call the cops. Powertripping neighborhood watch nutjob, part 2. Except unlike the Zimmerman case, there's [I]zero[/I] reasonable self-defense argument and there's multiple witnesses.
[quote] I fired my warning shot like I'm supposed to by law.[/quote]
I'm sorry, what?
[QUOTE=Fourier;50866756]Wouldn't air friction slow down bullet though?
Though bullets are designed to have least friction..[/QUOTE]
The velocity is lower than if you fired the bullet straight but it would still have the velocity to be fatal.
[QUOTE=Fourier;50866756]Wouldn't air friction slow down bullet though?
Though bullets are designed to have least friction..[/QUOTE]
It wouldn't slow it enough, unfortunately. In most cases their density is too high combined with their compact shape and their orientation is somewhat stable due to the latter and the way they spin (when not fired almost perfectly straight up, that is).
[QUOTE=TheTalon;50866812]I'm sorry, what?[/QUOTE]
He fucked the pooch in that 911 call. He said there were people cursing and yelling outside his home, so instead of calling the cops and making a noise complaint and waiting in the safety of his own home for the cops to deal with the issue, he decided to [i]leave the safety of his home[/i] to confront them from his garage.
When he said they "showed a firearm," he didn't say he shot them in reaction to brandishing a weapon - which would be manslaughter under NC law (but idiotic for leaving his house in the first place). Instead, he said he fired a warning shot. He incriminated himself. In North Carolina, and in pretty much every state in the country, the only legally excusable time to fire a weapon in self defense is when a person reasonably believes that they (or others) are facing [i]imminent death or grievous bodily harm[/i]. There's zero room for "warning shots" in that. [URL="http://www.kirkkirklaw.com/legal-resources/can-you-stand-your-ground-in-north-carolina/"]North Carolina has "stand your ground" laws[/URL], meaning you have no "duty to retreat" if an intruder enters your home/vehicle/workplace, but this guy [i]left his home to confront the partygoers[/i]. And then he "fired a warning shot," which is not legal in North Carolina even with their fairly liberal self defense laws. He killed someone who was on public property (a street) and had made no attempt to enter his residence according to multiple witnesses.
This is such an easy murder charge it's not even funny. Even if the guys in front of his house had firearms, there's no justification - it's a murder charge. What a deluded, power-tripping, racist little fuck.
[QUOTE=Jewish Paladin;50866737]I mean I don't know what you expected[/QUOTE]
You put guns and a possibly racially motivated shooting into a single thread on Facepunch, and someone is bound to say something completely stupid at some point.
From what it was worded, it sounded like u actualy needed to fire a warning shot before start to shot.
Obviously shoting in the air is still dangerous, my bad, maybe shoting on the ground, where u know it won't ricochet, but dig in the garden?
But still, in the end it seems it doesn't matter, the guy simply went full Zimmerman and shot apparently for no real reason from what I read there.
Normally I reserve judgement in these types of cases but I'm feeling good today so I think I'm going to jump the gun and post this on facebook and start condemning people as if I were there and know what happened
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;50866981]You put guns and a possibly racially motivated shooting into a single thread on Facepunch, and someone is bound to say something completely stupid at some point.[/QUOTE]
I'd be amazed if the pro-gun-to-a-fault people on here managed to find a way to defend this guy. He clearly had zero regard for the safety of himself or others. Any capable gun owner knows you [i]don't fire warning shots[/i], especially not "warning shots" that are pointed in someone's general direction, especially not when that person isn't actually an intruder and isn't even on your property, and [I]especially[/I] not when the person you're "warning" [I]has done literally nothing but be loud late at night.[/I]
North Carolina's laws on first degree murder establish that you either get the death penalty or life in prison. It defines first degree murder as "any kind of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing." The defense has to argue that his "warning shot" signifies that he didn't intend to kill anyone, but the fact that he said "I'm locked and loaded, I'm going to secure my neighborhood" gives the prosecution a [I]pretty fucking hefty[/I] piece of evidence showing that he was planning to use a firearm for reasons other than self-defense.
I really want more information on this case, like whether or not the "hoodlums" actually had firearms, but with the evidence we have so far, this has to be one of the most disgustingly clear-cut racially-motivated murders I've seen since that guy in Florida flat-out murdered a black teenager for playing his music too loudly.
I don't see any defense for this guy. If there was a riot going on or something and they were ransacking homes/cars I could see leaving your house to confront them in the street. That wasn't the case here.
Yeah, he's a fucking retard. Lock him up until his hair turns gray.
Take this guy's gun license away and put him in a mental facility.
Threat-identification skills [i]this[/i] bad have got to be dealt with.
About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?
[QUOTE=LaTrefle;50868947]About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?[/QUOTE]
The bullet might hit something and ricochet back up at you or someone else.
The only time you should shoot a gun is when you're certain that you know what you're intending to hit and you're prepared to hit it.
[QUOTE=LaTrefle;50868947]About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?[/QUOTE]
Damages the ground.
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
I mean you shoot anywhere and the bullets probably going to fuck something up.
[QUOTE=LaTrefle;50868947]About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?[/QUOTE]
it's a piece of metal travelling at 300 m/s, where ever it hits bad stuff is going to happen
[QUOTE=LaTrefle;50868947]About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?[/QUOTE]
Always be sure of your target amd whats beyond it, and dont point your gun at anything you dont intend to destroy
Firing at the ground can make your bullet take an unpredictablw path and potentially injure someone
If you own a gun, you have to be willing to kill somebody with it if you intens to use it for self defense. You dont fire warning shots, you dont shoot to wound, and you dont intimidate with it. If you dont shoot to kill, dont own a firearm.
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50868449]Take [b]this guy's gun license[/b] away and put him in a mental facility.
Threat-identification skills [i]this[/i] bad have got to be dealt with.[/QUOTE]
You don't need a license to own a gun in the USA. I find it funny how many people don't know this.
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
This guy is the poster child for requiring classes before being allowed to buy a gun.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;50869059]Always be sure of your target amd whats beyond it, and dont point your gun at anything you dont intend to destroy
Firing at the ground can make your bullet take an unpredictablw path and potentially injure someone
If you own a gun, you have to be willing to kill somebody with it if you intens to use it for self defense. You dont fire warning shots, you dont shoot to wound, and you dont intimidate with it. If you dont shoot to kill, dont own a firearm.[/QUOTE]
proper standpoint would be to shoot to neutralize a threat if we stay in that context. "don't shoot unless you're prepared to kill" seems a little more genuine
[QUOTE=Kybalt;50869092]You don't need a license to own a gun in the USA. I find it funny how many people don't know this.
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
This guy is the poster child for requiring classes before being allowed to buy a gun.[/QUOTE]
Gun classes wouldnt have prevented it. From everything we know so far, this guy just wanted an excuse to kill somebody.
[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;50865866]Oh boy. BLM will love this
[editline]dicks[/editline]
Can someone tell me if this is legally true? If he actually ended up hitting someone you can't consider this a warning shot anyways. And even if it was truly just by accident that he hit him, and not just a lie, it would still be negligent homicide.[/QUOTE]
warning shots aren't a requirement, and generally are frowned upon.
[editline]12th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=LaTrefle;50868947]About warning shots; why dont they just fire into the ground?[/QUOTE]
he may have, ricochets are dangerous and unpredictable.
Sounds like an almost complete repeat of the Trayvon Martin case, not going to bullshit here.
4 years after and we still can't get our shit together with making such garbage excuses of "taking the law in my own hands".
From the transcript of the call it sounds a lot like this guy was kinda looking to get into a confrontation. Even if he wasn't, he was pretty damn stupid behaving as he did - you don't fire a "warning shot", especially not with something like a shotgun.
[QUOTE=Krahn;50865870]This guy's statements makes no sense. Bordering on mentally ill / deluded or drunk (considering there was a party).
It sounds more like he shot somebody with some kind of grandiose "protector" delusions, or is just a dick/racist, scared about black people in his neighborhood, that shot someone and then realized he better think of a way to dig himself out of a murder charge.
Fucking hell. Easy there Rambo.[/QUOTE]
Scared about black people in the neighborhood?
Yeah just ignore that there were several dozen, at 1am, and they had guns too. That's not AT ALL IMPORTANT.
It was just some black kids lol!!! What a racist!!
[editline]12th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50866806]There's not much info on this yet, but apparently there was a large party two houses down. He apparently fired the shot from [i]inside his home[/i], breaking a window, and killing a man who was [i]in front of the mailbox[/i] by his home. In the street - not even on his property.
He gave a "warning shot" to some guys two houses down from a house party they were attending, killing him in the street. If he was on the guys' property, maybe there'd be an argument - but he was on the street in front of his property. There's no stand your ground law in the entire country that lets you take potshots at people on the street in front of your home.
This guy seems like a total nutcase. "There's some frigging black males outside my frigging house with firearms," even though he [I]knows[/I] there's a party two houses down, [i]nobody[/i] even engaged with him or instigated violence, and the one person he killed [i]wasn't even on his fucking property[/i].
Sorry, dude, but even if there are 20 black men outside your house camping out in the middle of the road, you can't fucking [i]shoot them[/i]. You call the cops. Powertripping neighborhood watch nutjob, part 2. Except unlike the Zimmerman case, there's [I]zero[/I] reasonable self-defense argument and there's multiple witnesses.[/QUOTE]
Look, a non knee jerk reaction that actually examines the facts
[editline]12th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=.Isak.;50867389]I'd be amazed if the pro-gun-to-a-fault people on here managed to find a way to defend this guy. He clearly had zero regard for the safety of himself or others. Any capable gun owner knows you [i]don't fire warning shots[/i], especially not "warning shots" that are pointed in someone's general direction, especially not when that person isn't actually an intruder and isn't even on your property, and [I]especially[/I] not when the person you're "warning" [I]has done literally nothing but be loud late at night.[/I]
North Carolina's laws on first degree murder establish that you either get the death penalty or life in prison. It defines first degree murder as "any kind of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing." The defense has to argue that his "warning shot" signifies that he didn't intend to kill anyone, but the fact that he said "I'm locked and loaded, I'm going to secure my neighborhood" gives the prosecution a [I]pretty fucking hefty[/I] piece of evidence showing that he was planning to use a firearm for reasons other than self-defense.
I really want more information on this case, like whether or not the "hoodlums" actually had firearms, but with the evidence we have so far, this has to be one of the most disgustingly clear-cut racially-motivated murders I've seen since that guy in Florida flat-out murdered a black teenager for playing his music too loudly.[/QUOTE]
Why would anybody defend this guy, let alone pro gun people who recognize this guy's trigger happy idiocy?
Gun owners should be the first person to villify this man for doing EVERYTHING wrong you can do with regards to personal defense involving gun use
[QUOTE=MadBomber;50865885]I dont think so actually, there is a chance of the bullet coming back down and causing damage.[/QUOTE]
At first I didn't want to believe that a bullet fired straight up could do any damage, imagining them falling like a pebble to the ground at terminal velocity.
However, some quick wikipedia reading was quite amusing:
[quote]Firearms expert Julian Hatcher studied falling bullets in the 1920s and calculated that .30 caliber rounds reach terminal velocities of 90 m/s (300 feet per second or 204 miles per hour).[7] A bullet traveling at only 61 m/s (200 feet per second) to 100 m/s (330 feet per second) can penetrate human skin.[/quote]
One incident especially takes the cake:
[quote]October 30, 2012: Twenty-three people were electrocuted after celebratory gunfire brought down a power cable during a wedding party in eastern Saudi Arabia.[/quote]
I wonder if this is the biggest amount of people ever killed by a single fired bullet.
This guy fucked up bad.
He's going to prison. This is an open and shut murder case.
And warning shots are not "legally required" in any State, county, city or municipal. I've never heard anyone encourage warning shots. The only reason you use a firearm is to defend yourself from immediate death or injury. Like unless he was about to die the gun should've never have come out.
And it wasn't even like they surrounded him or anything. He left his house and stood in the garage. He should've just waited for the PD.
This is some Wild West Cowboy stuff.
[editline]12th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Dr. Kyuros;50871117]Sounds like an almost complete repeat of the Trayvon Martin case, not going to bullshit here.
4 years after and we still can't get our shit together with making such garbage excuses of "taking the law in my own hands".[/QUOTE]
Not even remotely comparable.
[editline]12th August 2016[/editline]
If anything it is more akin to this case:
[url]https://thinkprogress.org/court-grants-new-trial-to-man-who-said-i-am-standing-my-ground-as-he-shot-neighbor-over-loud-music-ae36399e5836#.m3vuc5vhe[/url]
I don't know about the source. I just goggled it but I've heard this case cited in some classes and books I've read so its legit. Try to take the Zimmerman references with a grain of salt. I don't either of these examples are comparable to the Zimmerman case. In both of these examples the shooters were not in immediate danger, instigated the confrontation and used self defense law to attempt to excuse their actions.
You can argue that Zimmerman shouldn't have done X, Y, Z but at the end of the day he didn't shoot Trayvon until he was ontop of him and physically assaulting him to a degree he reasonably believed his life was in urgent jeopardy.
These two were safe and sound in their own homes and decided to go confronting people with their guns for whatever reason. Completely different.
There is a reason Zimmerman got off on his charges and these two did not/will not.
The only time I've heard of warning shots being used seriously are at sea, when warships will fire 'a shot over the bow' - at least there you have the knowledge that all your shot is going to hit is open, deep water.
Anywhere else, you're risking someone's life.
[QUOTE=Dr. Kyuros;50871117]Sounds like an almost complete repeat of the Trayvon Martin case, not going to bullshit here.
4 years after and we still can't get our shit together with making such garbage excuses of "taking the law in my own hands".[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman where as this guy just killed a guy and tried to make it seem like it was in defense of his neighborhood.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.