Teenage Girl Shot And Killed In Texas Because Of Stand Your Ground Law - Polidicks

Apparently her own accomplice shot her by accident (by his own admission).. not the person in the home defending themselves.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;36716870]But, I'd be willing to bet that any robber who isn't scared off by the sign would be more likely to come into the store armed themselves and not give the employees any chances. and the person who shot them, too. you see, I'm not one of those people who thinks that making a stupid mistake means a person deserves to die. [editline]10th July 2012[/editline] hey guy, be even creepier. i dare you.[/QUOTE] No one deserves to die and I never said that. But when you kick down someones door in the middle of the night you're pretty much putting your own life out there. I don't think you should shoot someone [i]just[/i] for breaking in. When someone breaks in shooting at them should be the absolute last resort, but if the person ends up dead because they broke in it's 100% their fault for doing it in the first place. You wouldn't have the lung cancer if you didn't smoke a pack-a-day. You wouldn't be dead if you didn't kick down someones door.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36716884]Well, a home invasion IS a "shoot-first-ask-questions-later" situation, isn't it? You don't give the invader(s) a chance to get an advantage. You're more than welcome to give them a warning or attempt to assess the situation (which isn't always possible), but the invaders quite literally lost their right to live the second they broke into your home. Like I said earlier, it's a shame that she was killed but it's her own damn fault.[/QUOTE] It isn't about them having the right to live (they always have that right). It's about whether or not their right to live takes priority over someone else's right to defend their own life.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;36716750]it only takes a step up when she reveals herself to be threat to the homeowners lives (i'm guessing she wasn't about to rape and murder them)[/QUOTE] I believe an article linked further up the page(page 2, I took too long typing this) says she was likely killed by one of the friends she was with, not the homeowner. So yes, they were armed and therefore a threat. And if the teenage white girl can be a deadly threat, then why run the risk of hoping that the person that kicked in your door isn't going to do anything to you or your family? Unless you can confirm they aren't a threat, they should be treated as a threat. Anything other than that is a mistake that could end up with you or someone you care about dead. As cruel as it sounds, it's better for the criminal busting through your window to get shot than for your brother, son, wife, friend, or yourself to get shot.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36716884]but the invaders quite literally lost their right to live the second they broke into your home.[/QUOTE] Change your avatar. You are a shameful human being and I am no longer okay with you using my doodles to represent yourself.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36716884]the invaders quite literally lost their right to live the second they broke into your home.[/QUOTE] there seems to be a huge disconnect here are you familiar with terms such as "cruel and unusual punishment", "Protecting the accused", and "no punishment without due process of law?" they're in our constitution you should read it some time hell even under hammurabi law that's not right

Call the cops on them, jesus fuck.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36716972]Call the cops on them, jesus fuck.[/QUOTE] The police don't arrive instantaneously. There's enough time in between calling them and the police arriving for things to go very, very wrong.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;36716914] lol this is fucking disgusting. you should be ashamed.[/QUOTE] I admit I worded that poorly and I apologize, but I was simply trying to state what the Castle Doctrine implies. If you break into someones house, especially with intent to harm, the owner of the home is fully within his/her rights to kill you. Would I kill a robber without giving them a reasonable chance to get the hell out? Of course not. But I am saying that once you make the decision to break into someones home, especially in a state where the Castle Doctrine is upheld, you're voluntarily putting your life on the line.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36716884] the invaders quite literally lost their right to live the second they broke into your home.[/QUOTE] I have to entirely disagree with this. If someone breaks into my house and steals some cash, I'm not justified in any moral sense in taking their life as they run out the back door. If they have me or someone in my house at gunpoint, that is a different case though because there is an active threat.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36716938]Change your avatar. You are a shameful human being and I am no longer okay with you using my doodles to represent yourself.[/QUOTE] no lankist i dont think you understand property rights are literally the most sacred rights in america. i know this because ron paul 2012 gold standard bit coin

[QUOTE=dogmachines;36716981]The police don't arrive instantaneously. There's enough time in between calling them and the police arriving for things to go very, very wrong.[/QUOTE] Stand your ground then, hide with a gun trained on an entrance, this person murdered some chick while she was outside, she didn't DO anything yet, I think he could have waited for the cops to come instead of just plain shooting her in the head.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;36716981]The police don't arrive instantaneously. There's enough time in between calling them and the police arriving for things to go very, very wrong.[/QUOTE] run. threaten. your goddamn stuff is not worth a human life. everything you own can be on fire and you still wouldn't be justified in killing another human being. There's this concept called "innocent until proven guilty." It dictates that you don't shoot first and ask questions later. You're in a potentially dangerous situation? Fucking deal. You don't get to kill someone just because something MIGHT go wrong. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Clementine;36716997]Stand your ground then, hide with a gun trained on an entrance, this person murdered some chick while she was outside, she didn't DO anything yet, I think he could have waited for the cops to come instead of just plain shooting her in the head.[/QUOTE] Law and order fucking breaks down when we start shooting over what people MIGHT do.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;36716914]This here is the problem. I think this mentality of "someone is in my house without my permission, so they're probably going to try to murder me" is A: false more often than it is true and B:does more harm than good. I think that is a wrong attitude to hold. lol this is fucking disgusting. you should be ashamed.[/QUOTE] It does more harm then good when it comes to people killed yes, but what else should people do? Leave their lives in the hands of a home invader because it "usually doesn't happen". I don't know about you, but I would not endanger my life in such a situation. I would rather kill whoever broke into my home then take a chance of potentially getting shot. Please tell me, what would [i]your[/i] solution be?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36717003]run. threaten. your goddamn stuff is not worth a human life. everything you own can be on fire and you still wouldn't be justified in killing another human being. There's this concept called "innocent until proven guilty." It dictates that you don't shoot first and ask questions later. You're in a potentially dangerous situation? Fucking deal. You don't get to kill someone just because something MIGHT go wrong.[/QUOTE] Its not like it was a pack of thieves either, it was one small young woman, if it was a pack of thieves then...okay maybe you should shoot to defend (not go out of your way to shoot them in the face)

[QUOTE=Lankist;36717003]run. threaten. your goddamn stuff is not worth a human life. everything you own can be on fire and you still wouldn't be justified in killing another human being. There's this concept called "innocent until proven guilty." It dictates that you don't shoot first and ask questions later. You're in a potentially dangerous situation? Fucking deal. You don't get to kill someone just because something MIGHT go wrong.[/QUOTE] Alright, I'll let them shoot me in the back as I flee. Since that kind of stuff doesn't happen every time a home invasion goes down, obviously I'm not justified in planning for the worst case of the person in my home having intent to kill.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36716997]Stand your ground then, hide with a gun trained on an entrance, this person murdered some chick while she was outside, she didn't DO anything yet, I think he could have waited for the cops to come instead of just plain shooting her in the head.[/QUOTE] One of the accomplices was the one that shot her in the head.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36716997]Stand your ground then, hide with a gun trained on an entrance, this person murdered some chick while she was outside, she didn't DO anything yet, I think he could have waited for the cops to come instead of just plain shooting her in the head.[/QUOTE] That isn't what happened though. The OP's article was extremely vague and says virtually nothing about the details of how she died. There is another article where her own accomplice admits that he was probably the one who shot accidentally shot her while engaged in a gun battle with a person inside the house.

[QUOTE=OvB;36716922]No one deserves to die and I never said that. But when you kick down someones door in the middle of the night you're pretty much putting your own life out there. I don't think you should shoot someone just for breaking in. When someone breaks in shooting at them should be the absolute last resort, but if the person ends up dead because they broke in it's 100% their fault for doing it in the first place. [/QUOTE] I don't accept this. I don't think our society should be founded on absolutes like this. I think cases should be judged on a case-by-case basis. "You break into someone's home and you lose your right to life" is a fucking ghastly way to run a society. If robbers (who are going to go on robbing people whether or not homeowners are armed, I honestly don't believe in deterrents as A Thing That Exists) didn't feel like they had a chance of being shot to death the moment they entered any house, there would probably be fewer robbers breaking into houses prepared to kill the homeowners. I don't believe that owning a gun is a particularly viable strategy of defending your [i]life[/i] from a midnight home invasion and I don't believe that giving homeowners free reign to shoot whoever they please is a reasonable solution to home invasions.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36717019]Its not like it was a pack of thieves either, it was one small young woman, if it was a pack of thieves then...okay maybe you should shoot to defend (not go out of your way to shoot them in the face)[/QUOTE] Except it was, read the goddamn article. And the homeowner didn't shoot her, one of her friends accidently did while SHOOTING AT THE HOMEOWNER. The homeowner returning fire is one of the best cases of justified use of deadly force in recent memory.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36716987] I was simply trying to state what the Castle Doctrine implies.[/QUOTE] are you aware that you are actually presenting a good reason for why castle doctrine is bad

texas yee haw!

[QUOTE=dogmachines;36716981]The police don't arrive instantaneously. There's enough time in between calling them and the police arriving for things to go very, very wrong.[/QUOTE] Yeah you could have a pizza delivered faster

[QUOTE=Clementine;36717019]Its not like it was a pack of thieves either, it was one small young woman, if it was a pack of thieves then...okay maybe you should shoot to defend (not go out of your way to shoot them in the face)[/QUOTE] (Did not read the article.) It was in fact a pack of thieves. With guns too.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36717019]Its not like it was a pack of thieves either, it was one small young woman, if it was a pack of thieves then...okay maybe you should shoot to defend (not go out of your way to shoot them in the face)[/QUOTE] Read the article before posting.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;36717033]Except it was, read the goddamn article. And the homeowner didn't shoot her, one of her friends accidently did while SHOOTING AT THE HOMEOWNER.[/QUOTE] I have suffered from Facepunchitis...reading nothing but the title

[QUOTE=thisispain;36716956]there seems to be a huge disconnect here are you familiar with terms such as "cruel and unusual punishment", "Protecting the accused", and "no punishment without due process of law?" they're in our constitution you should read it some time hell even under hammurabi law that's not right[/QUOTE] Cool story bro Home owner has the right to live too, live without some asshole depriving him/her of his/her property or life. The home owner didn't know the kids, didn't know their true intentions. Some people break in to houses to steal, some do it to rape, some do it to kill. Obviously if they're breaking in to a home and organized this event a head (Premeditated) they automatically assume the risk of such a activity. They can't blame anyone but themselves. Now does it mean you go out of your way to hunt them down as they flee and kill everything in sight...of course not. But it does not mean you should completely roll over and be a coward when someone breaks in to your home. For me if someone broke in, saw I had a gun and started to flee I would let them go. But if they continued to move towards me, have a weapon or act as if they had a weapon they're going down - no hesitation. I'm not going to let someone hurt me so i can be extra sure that they're really bad people.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;36717022]Alright, I'll let them shoot me in the back as I flee. Since that kind of stuff doesn't happen every time a home invasion goes down, obviously I'm not justified in planning for the worst case of the person in my home having intent to kill.[/QUOTE] What the fuck kind of bullshit logic is this? She MIGHT have had a gun (she didn't) and she MIGHT have been there to kill (she wasn't), so it's okay to fucking KILL someone on that supposition? Fucking no. Your goddamn life is not worth so much that you can just shoot whoever the fuck you want because they MIGHT harm you.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36717047]I have suffered from Facepunchitis...reading nothing but the title[/QUOTE] If your gonna read the thread title only then you might wanna reconsider the SENSATIONALIST HEADLINES forum.

[QUOTE=Clementine;36717019]Its not like it was a pack of thieves either, it was one small young woman, if it was a pack of thieves then...okay maybe you should shoot to defend (not go out of your way to shoot them in the face)[/QUOTE] But it was a pack of thieves, and one of the thieves shot the girl, not the homeowner.