122 posts in this topic

Posted

A Georgia sheriff's department is still deciding whether to take legal action against a man who shot and killed a 72-year-old Alzheimer's patient whom he thought was a prowler.

The Nov. 27 death of Ron Westbrook has re-ignited the debate over "Stand Your Ground" laws.

Investigators said that Westbrook had walked nearly three miles in sub-freezing temperatures and was lost and confused when he knocked on the door of home of Joe Hendrix's fianc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And why was a person with advanced Alzheimer's in a situation where they could wander off without alarms going off (they are on the market)? And sometimes they are very aggressive in the later stages so you can't just give them an automatic pass either. There have been many cases where cops have had to defend themselves from dementia patients.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There are 2 problems I see here. As the above mentioned, why or how did someone with advanced Alzheimers wonder off like that. Secondly, while I respect the homeowners rights to protect himself and family, was there no nonlethal options available. I can't speak for what was going through his mind at 4 am, but at some point you have to wonder though was 4 shots really necessary. Would a warning shot not suffice? Better yet, did the Alzheimers patient make a threatening move towards the homeowner other than just continuing to walk. I still have a hard time believing he feared for his life, by an older guy that was cold and confused. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why should the right to shoot an unarmed person outweigh the right to life?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sorry. I'm all for self defense.. and 2nd right amendment laws.. but this guy didn't have to shoot and kill a 72 year old man.. He didn't have to go outside.. He could have called the cops first.. then if things escalated proceed with the next steps.. Guy was trigger happy. 

 

With that said.. How come someone didn't take better car of this man.. 

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And why was a person with advanced Alzheimer's in a situation where they could wander off without alarms going off (they are on the market)? And sometimes they are very aggressive in the later stages so you can't just give them an automatic pass either. There have been many cases where cops have had to defend themselves from dementia patients.

 

Yup, totally the fault of the 72 year old man suffering from Alzheimer's.  :rolleyes:

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sorry. I'm all for self defense.. and 2nd right amendment laws.. but this guy didn't have to shoot and kill a 72 year old man.. He didn't have to go outside.. He could have called the cops first.. then if things escalated proceed with the next steps.. Guy was trigger happy. 

 

With that said.. How come someone didn't take better car of this man.. 

In the news video, it sounds like the guy woke up in the middle of the night and decided to take a walk. I would imagine the rest of the family was still asleep, but obviously there will be questions on if he has done this before and if there should have been more security around the house to prevent this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So the homeowner opened his door and willfully decided to leave his home to confront this "intruder" outside. The man with Alzheimer's was unarmed and didn't make any threatening gestures besides walking forward, and the owner shot 4 times. Sounds like unnecessary and excessive force to me. Especially, since he could have just shut the door, or asked who it was through the door.

 

In my opinion, I consider the owner to be in the wrong and a murderer. But that's because I am completely against "stand-your-ground" laws. They are two ambiguous and too liberal in their terms, and basically give you a license to kill if you're standing on your own property. That is just ridiculous.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This clearly doesn't meet any of the Stand Your Ground law requirements, and the guy obviously over-reacted to the situation.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

.....was there no nonlethal options available. I can't speak for what was going through his mind at 4 am, but at some point you have to wonder though was 4 shots really necessary. Would a warning shot not suffice? Better yet, did the Alzheimers patient make a threatening move towards the homeowner other than just continuing to walk. I still have a hard time believing he feared for his life, by an older guy that was cold and confused.

What nonlethal means? Here in Michigan we only recently gained the right to have Tasers, but only with a pistol license, and they could kill an old guy too. Pepper spray is also problematic for a guy his age.

As to the danger he presented by walking at someone, how can you tell at night that they don't have a knife or other smallish close quarters weapon? Self defense classes teach not to let them get closer than 20 feet. At night could you reliably tell his age at that distance, especially if he were backlit by street lights?

4 shots? Not that far out of line. In our State defined self defense classes they teach to fire in volleys of 2-3 rounds, especially when using lower powered weapons like a .25 auto, .38 Special, .380 auto or a 9mm auto.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There are 2 problems I see here. As the above mentioned, why or how did someone with advanced Alzheimers wonder off like that. Secondly, while I respect the homeowners rights to protect himself and family, was there no nonlethal options available. I can't speak for what was going through his mind at 4 am, but at some point you have to wonder though was 4 shots really necessary. Would a warning shot not suffice? Better yet, did the Alzheimers patient make a threatening move towards the homeowner other than just continuing to walk. I still have a hard time believing he feared for his life, by an older guy that was cold and confused. 

 

Again with the freaking warning shots.

 

**ALL OTHER DETAILS OF THIS INCIDENT ASIDE**

 

Where the hell does this stupid idea of "warning shots" come from? TV?

 

You never, ever, fire a bullet off indiscriminately into the air. You only shoot to hit your intended target in order to put down a threat. Firearms are not meant to be an alarm or a siren.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What nonlethal means? Here in Michigan we only recently gained the right to have Tasers, but only with a pistol license, and they could kill an old guy too. Pepper spray is also problematic for a guy his age.

As to the danger he presented by walking at someone, how can you tell at night that they don't have a knife or other smallish close quarters weapon? Self defense classes teach not to let them get closer than 20 feet. At night could you reliably tell his age at that distance, especially if he were backlit by street lights?

4 shots? Not that far out of line. In our State defined self defense classes they teach to fire in volleys of 2-3 rounds, especially when using lower powered weapons like a .25 auto, .38 Special, .380 auto or a 9mm auto.

if you are safely inside your house and chose to go outside your barrier of safety....you don't have to engage someone this isn't warfare its a 72 year old who knocked on your door this isn't a fight, its paranoia and someone who couldn't wait to fire their weapon because they could have stayed inside or took a 5 seconds to assess whether the 72 year old man was there for help or to "start something"

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yup, totally the fault of the 72 year old man suffering from Alzheimer's.  :rolleyes:

There you go again with pulling things out of context.

 

If anyone was at fault for that part of this incident, it was the caregiver for not keeping track of the patient.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There you go again with pulling things out of context.

 

If anyone was at fault for that part of this incident, it was the caregiver for not keeping track of the patient.

 

Looks like someone totally missed the :rolleyes: image at the end of his statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sorry. I'm all for self defense.. and 2nd right amendment laws.. but this guy didn't have to shoot and kill a 72 year old man.. He didn't have to go outside.. He could have called the cops first.. then if things escalated proceed with the next steps.. Guy was trigger happy. 

 

With that said.. How come someone didn't take better car of this man.. 

 

This is it, Why didnt he wait inside his house, Yes he walked out seen the man, told him to stop. But he could of walked back into his house locked the door and waited for the police! Its not like the man was running towards him. This was a pointless death and one where i see him get away with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What nonlethal means? Here in Michigan we only recently gained the right to have Tasers, but only with a pistol license, and they could kill an old guy too. Pepper spray is also problematic for a guy his age.

As to the danger he presented by walking at someone, how can you tell at night that they don't have a knife or other smallish close quarters weapon? Self defense classes teach not to let them get closer than 20 feet. At night could you reliably tell his age at that distance, especially if he were backlit by street lights?

4 shots? Not that far out of line. In our State defined self defense classes they teach to fire in volleys of 2-3 rounds, especially when using lower powered weapons like a .25 auto, .38 Special, .380 auto or a 9mm auto.

 

You know, he could have just, not gone out if he was so afraid of the old man, and maybe called the cops...

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There you go again with pulling things out of context.

 

If anyone was at fault for that part of this incident, it was the caregiver for not keeping track of the patient.

 

LOL so what  its ok to shoot someone thats outside your house?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Looks like someone totally missed the :rolleyes: image at the end of his statement.

How does that change the meaning of what he said?

 

Looks to me like it was a potshot at what DocM said.

 

DocM didn't say it was the patient's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

LOL so what  its ok to shoot someone thats outside your house?

Wow.

 

Lets read what I said.

 

If anyone was at fault for that part of this incident, it was the caregiver for not keeping track of the patient.

 

I never said it was ok to shoot anyone.  However, the patient should have NEVER been in that position.  Clearly, the caregiver screwed up and should be held responsible for THAT part of this incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There you go again with pulling things out of context.

 

If anyone was at fault for that part of this incident, it was the caregiver for not keeping track of the patient.

 

firstly it's(well over here anyway) illegal to completely lock them in, fire/emergency issues and all that. and despite their alzheimers and age, these people(yes, they are people, not old dogs you lock up in a kennel before they die) can be very clever and resourceful in getting out and doing what they think they need or want to do. Usually they think they're 30,40 or 50 years back in time. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

firstly it's(well over here anyway) illegal to completely lock them in, fire/emergency issues and all that. and despite their alzheimers and age, these people(yes, they are people, not old dogs you lock up in a kennel before they die) can be very clever and resourceful in getting out and doing what they think they need or want to do. Usually they think they're 30,40 or 50 years back in time. 

Who said locks?

 

How about supervision?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

And why was a person with advanced Alzheimer's in a situation where they could wander off without alarms going off (they are on the market)? And sometimes they are very aggressive in the later stages so you can't just give them an automatic pass either. There have been many cases where cops have had to defend themselves from dementia patients.

 

People like this "get out" all the time.  Yea, he should of been cared for better but then again, people need to use thought along with the "Stand your ground" law.

 

I have had people knock on my door in the middle of the night.  I never opened the door and on occasion, had to call the cops.  But I stayed inside.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I can't believe some of you defend the shooter, or want to lay the blame at a care giver.

There was no need for the man the go outside and confront him.

He could have stayed inside, call the cops, and monitor what the old man was doing.

If he still looked like a threat, then he could have shot him.

Seems a lot more reasonable then walking out and shooting the guy!

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Close the door and call the police, it's not difficult.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I can't believe some of you defend the shooter, or want to lay the blame at a care giver.

There was no need for the man the go outside and confront him.

He could have stayed inside, call the cops, and monitor what the old man was doing.

If he still looked like a threat, then he could have shot him.

Seems a lot more reasonable then walking out and shooting the guy!

If the caregiver had prevented the guy from getting away, then the situation would never have happened in the first place.

 

What if the shooter used a bat instead and the patient died from the trauma to the head?

 

 

I can't believe how many people in this thread want to ignore the caregiver's lack of responsibility and give them a free pass.

 

No, the the homeowner shouldn't have shot him, but the situation should have never presented itself in the first place.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.