[QUOTE=The golden;39976047]You need to look at this from the homeowners point of view.
Some teen just broke into his house and tripped his alarm. When approached and warned he refuses to yield and continues to advance through the house.[/QUOTE]
First thing I'd done when the alarm tripped would be phone the police, then go investigate. Even then I'd be loathe to shoot unless I was attacked. Someone staggering towards me up a set a stairs would not be something I'd consider as being attacked.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;39976074]just as much a victim as the teen, if not more.[/QUOTE]
Weeeeell he wasn't shot to death so I think more might be a stretch.
[editline]19th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39976092]well someone broke into his home mistakenly, not a real offense, but in the heat of the moment and in a situation where the intruder isn't listening and isn't responding to the warnings then it's a potentially scary situation. You don't know that person is just a drunk kid who doesn't mean harm, he could be a serious burglar, he's already ignored your warnings so he must mean to fight if he isn't running then.
It's not like there's an honest moral highground here for anyone, it's a terrible situation. The gun owner did what he could within reason to not overreact and the poor kid was just too drunk to know what was going on it seems.[/QUOTE]
Sure, I agree, I was just trying to understand what Camundongo was saying. Those statements seemed a little contradictory. Or at least confusing.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976098]Weeeeell he wasn't shot to death so I think more might be a stretch.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, he didn't die. But the emotional turmoil of knowing you shot and killed a drunk teenager in your house will definitely have long-term consequences for this guy. Who knows how badly he'll deal with it, or if he'll move on fine.
I'd imagine knowing you killed a kid in your own home would tear you up inside for an awfully long time.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;39976074]If you were woken up in the middle of the night, 2am, to your burglar alarm going off, and a stranger shambling up your stairs in the dark, without responding or leaving when warned, (something that most normal burglars would respond to by fleeing at least, meaning this man probably thought the intruder was armed and dangerous, or a lunatic) even when a warning shot is fired, you're likely going to fire and try to protect yourself and your family. You don't know how dangerous this person is, and for all you know, they could be trying to harm you and everyone else in your house. You fire the gun in order to neutralize the threat, and unfortunately the teen died as a consequence.
The teenager didn't deserve to die, but the home owner did nothing wrong, and I think most people would have done the same thing. He killed a man, and I'm sure he's going through emotional problems, and possibly PTSD as a result. He is by no means "in the wrong," and is just as much a victim as the teen, if not more.[/QUOTE]
This situation is fucked all around, but I believe that sometimes shitty accidents just happen and there's not always anybody who really is at ultimate fault.
[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;39975915]Did you read? He fired a warning shot and told the teen to leave and the teen kept walking towards him.[/QUOTE]
Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;39976095]First thing I'd done when the alarm tripped would be phone the police, then go investigate. Even then I'd be loathe to shoot unless I was attacked. Someone staggering towards me up a set a stairs would not be something I'd consider as being attacked.[/QUOTE]
You say that now, but you're not actually in a life-threatening situation. In that situation, with family in your house, you don't have time to take that risk. When you're actually in that event, I'm sure your morality is going to be skewed by "oh fuck someone is in my house, possibly going to kill my wife and children and I, what do I do?"
Adrenaline rush, fear, anger, all these things are going through you at once. You don't really have time to think rationally.
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
How was the guy supposed to know the kid wasn't an armed 25+ year old man with intent to murder his family? In that situation, you're not going to sit down and think about whose in your house. There's a stranger in your home, you're going to protect yourself and your family.
You assume that if someone breaks into your home, they have intent to do harm to you, especially if they don't leave after warned.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976058]
I'm saying the kid made a mistake. The other guy was saying it's the kid's fault for breaking into someone's house but he wasn't trying to.[/QUOTE]
So, it's not the kids fault for breaking and entering, and not yielding to warnings because he was drunk?
Does this argument work for drunk drivers?
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
he couldn't have known that
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
That really only seems viable when it's not the heat of the moment and your house hasn't just been broken into.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;39976134]You say that now, but you're not actually in a life-threatening situation. In that situation, with family in your house, you don't have time to take that risk. When you're actually in that event, I'm sure your morality is going to be skewed by "oh fuck someone is in my house, possibly going to kill my wife and children and I, what do I do?"
Adrenaline rush, fear, anger, all these things are going through you at once. You don't really have time to think rationally.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the article ever mentioned that the killer had anybody else living with him.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976098]
Sure, I agree, I was just trying to understand what Camundongo was saying. Those statements seemed a little contradictory. Or at least confusing.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the home owner part was should be replaced with the teenager, I made a typo there.
Also I guess as someone from the UK, I'm arguing from a cultural (and also to a large degree a legal) viewpoint that has a drastically different view of 'reasonable force', so I'm bound to be unpopular from the off :v:.
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
"Just knocking someone out," could cause serious mental issues, including coma and death. Had he done that and the kid wound up in a coma people would be calling him out for using lethal force.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;39976152]So, it's not the kids fault for breaking and entering,[/QUOTE]
No? Well, in a sense it is. He should have to pay for damages etc. but there wasn't any malicious intent behind it if it happened like the article says.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;39976152]and not yielding to warnings because he was drunk?[/QUOTE]
Did I defend that at some point? Clearly the homeowner was justifiably scared when the kid didn't react to warnings and of course he's gonna respond with force.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;39976152]Does this argument work for drunk drivers?[/QUOTE]
Drunk driving is inherently dangerous. Entering a house while drunk is not inherently dangerous.
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
There is a possibly armed intruder of god knows what kind of mental stability and physical capability roaming around your house breaking windows and tripping alarms. He presents a possibly lethal threat to you and your family. This isn't a game, you don't just knock someone out or hide and call the cops.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976209]Drunk driving is inherently dangerous. [B]breaking and[/B] Entering a house while drunk is inherently dangerous.[/QUOTE]
He didn't just enter.
[editline]19th March 2013[/editline]
Actually, better yet. Forget the drunk part. Breaking and entering a house period is inherently dangerous.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;39976095]First thing I'd done when the alarm tripped would be phone the police, then go investigate. Even then I'd be loathe to shoot unless I was attacked. Someone staggering towards me up a set a stairs would not be something I'd consider as being attacked.[/QUOTE]
Even if you called the police, there is still someone in your house and what are you supposed to do in the time it takes the police to get to your house.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;39975982]According to the homeowner. He is the only source we have, for all we know he was an overzealous gun owner and fired instantly.[/QUOTE]
OK
You have to provide proof for that though.
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39976429]He didn't just enter.
[editline]19th March 2013[/editline]
Actually, better yet. Forget the drunk part. Breaking and entering a house period is inherently dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Both articles just say his friends helped him through the window
Regardless, what is the difference? Was someone going to be lying down on the floor just inside the window and get showered in glass? He's not really posing a danger to others, certainly not on the same order of magnitude as driving a ton of metal around at 60mph while drunk off his ass.
if you shoot someone in the leg, theirs no chance they'll be able to attack you.. thats what the home owner should have done
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976494]Both articles just say his friends helped him through the window
Regardless, what is the difference? Was someone going to be lying down on the floor just inside the window and get showered in glass? He's not really posing a danger to others, certainly not on the same order of magnitude as driving a ton of metal around at 60mph while drunk off his ass.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't referring to the danger he poses to others. I was referring to the danger posed to himself. Breaking and entering while shitfaced (or not) is exceedingly dangerous in an occupied building in America, [i]especially[/i] one with an alarm system. In much the same way as driving while trashed is dangerous.
But if you want to get into the risk he posed, see the rest of the thread. You are asking the person to make their decision based on a pathetic amount of information, in a very adrenaline pumped moment. He was threatened, and a warning shot was fired, without backing down. To say that everyone should consider him harmless in that situation irrespective of whether he was harmless or not is absolutely ridiculous. There is no way of knowing. We've been over this about 5 times in the thread already.
Yeah, it sucks that he was shot. It sucks even more that he was killed, but your line of reasoning is patently absurd.
[QUOTE=pajarojamal;39976547]if you shoot someone in the leg, theirs no chance they'll be able to attack you.. thats what the home owner should have done[/QUOTE]
It's almost impossible for even a trained police officer to hit a limb in a high pressure situation like that, it's completely unreasonable to ask a scared homeowner to do it. If you're firing a gun at someone you should be prepared to kill.
The kid made a mistake and I really people would check a little bit more before shooting. Of course, this still isn't a good excuse for gun regulation or gun banning.
[QUOTE=pajarojamal;39976547]if you shoot someone in the leg, theirs no chance they'll be able to attack you.. thats what the home owner should have done[/QUOTE]
There's a million different ways that a leg injury can kill you in a matter of minutes, if not seconds. You have some seriously massive veins and arteries there. You can bleed out in less than a minute, and there isn't a thing in the world short of instant medical attention or quick clot type compounds that has a chance of saving you.
And if you had bothered to read, he did fire a warning shot.
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39976566]I wasn't referring to the danger he poses to others. I was referring to the danger posed to himself. Breaking and entering while shitfaced (or not) is exceedingly dangerous in an occupied building in America, [i]especially[/i] one with an alarm system. In much the same way as driving while trashed is dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Great but that wasn't what I was arguing about so I don't see how your post is relevant. The argument was, "If this kid isn't responsible for accidentally going into the wrong house while drunk, are drunk drivers not responsible for the damage they cause?" I was saying that those are not comparable, since driving at all while drunk is inherently dangerous to everyone involved, but trying to get into your house (and accidentally going into the wrong one) is not a dangerous act in itself. The question was never, "is there a danger posed to you by entering someone else's house?"
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39976566]But if you want to get into the risk he posed, see the rest of the thread. You are asking the person to make their decision based on a pathetic amount of information, in a very adrenaline pumped moment. He was threatened, and a warning shot was fired, without backing down. To say that everyone should consider him harmless in that situation irrespective of whether he was harmless or not is absolutely ridiculous. There is no way of knowing. We've been over this about 5 times in the thread already.[/QUOTE]
What? I never said the homeowner was in the wrong. (except for my very first post but I rescinded that for obvious reasons)
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39976566]Yeah, it sucks that he was shot. It sucks even more that he was killed, but your line of reasoning is patently absurd.[/QUOTE]
It's pretty evident that you aren't even following my line of reasoning since the whole thing above this is a strawman.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976494]Both articles just say his friends helped him through the window
Regardless, what is the difference? Was someone going to be lying down on the floor just inside the window and get showered in glass? He's not really posing a danger to others, certainly not on the same order of magnitude as driving a ton of metal around at 60mph while drunk off his ass.[/QUOTE]
How was the home owner to know this intruder was not a danger? Most of the reasoning you are giving is using the information we now know, the homeowner most likely had no idea who it was, or why someone was breaking into his house. Honestly if I was woken up to someone entering my house early in the morning, proceeded to give warnings to leave, and the intruder persisted in my home I would fire away.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;39976628]How was the home owner to know this intruder was not a danger? Honestly if I was woken up to someone entering my house early in the morning, proceeded to give warnings to leave, and the intruder persisted in my home I would fire away.[/QUOTE]
I am not claiming that the homeowner was supposed to know he was not a threat, what are you talking about?
[editline]19th March 2013[/editline]
See a few posts up:
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39976209]Clearly the homeowner was justifiably scared when the kid didn't react to warnings and of course he's gonna respond with force.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Dizzeh;39976133]Ya but being drunk like the teen was, there was no need to shoot him. Knocking him out and calling the cops would've sufficed. Even if he hadn't noticed he was drunk, holding him back an calling the cops or going somewhere in the house and hiding an calling the cops would've worked just as well.[/QUOTE]
yes he should have tactically knocked him out with his ninja chair throwing skills at 2am all dark
retarded headline/title how about "But Caleb had been drinking and had gone to the wrong house"
[editline]20th March 2013[/editline]
be safe when drinking thats all there is to this story
[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;39976737]retarded headline/title how about "But Caleb had been drinking and had gone to the wrong house"
[editline]20th March 2013[/editline]
be safe when drinking thats all there is to this story[/QUOTE]
If he didn't sneak out of his house this would of never happened.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.