California man, 80 shot burglar despite pleas of pregnancy

[theyarecomingforyou]

Its not vengance and that is taken from the the artical

The definition of 'vengeance' is "punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong", which is obviously applicable here. He chased after and shot in the back an unarmed pregnant woman begging for her life. That cannot in any way be construed as self-defence.

 

As I said, two wrongs don't make a right.

[eddman]

Some do really like to repeat "murder, murder".

 

Read this:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense

 

This is NOT a murder, but manslaughter and quite possibly involuntary.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter_(United_States_law)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder

 

Yes, we can voice our opinions, but there is a difference between a reasonable and educated opinion and the one that isn't; and we don't even know the details of the case.

 

And there's also this, which DocM mentioned:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

[Nogib]

I will always continue to celebrate the death of lowlife criminals.  This homeowner should get a medal for making the world a better place!!!

[spenser.d]

Its not vengance and that is taken from the the artical

the guy has been robbed before 3x and when these people robbing him noticed he was coming home there first thought was not run it was attack and just because some nut job goes O crap hes got a gun and yells w/e she can to not get shot If she had not yelled those exact words this would be a nonstory

and the cops are basiclly useless they dont activly presue things like this they just go yup you got robbed noted. the cops dont protect they just come to document the aftermath 98% of the time

Yes it was vengeance. What she said had no bearing on this being a story or the fact that this guy shot her in cold blood after any threat had passed. He should be jailed, as should the other burglar. This isn't the wild ######ing west. We live in a civilized society where we don't allow people to shoot other people just because they've been wronged. You need to actually be in danger. This old man was no longer in danger.

[techbeck]

 

And there's also this, which DocM mentioned:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

 

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others."^[2]

 

 

The old guy used deadly force which is mostly prohibited.  See above quote.  Of course the old guy can say he was concerned for his life regardless if he actually felt that way, or uses it as an excuse to get off.

I will always continue to celebrate the death of lowlife criminals.  This homeowner should get a medal for making the world a better place!!!

 

Nice, so I should be dead then.  Even tho I was never caught stealing when I was younger, I was basically a criminal and according to you, a low life.

 

Nice way of thinking.....

[Lizardslap]

Yes it was vengeance. What she said had no bearing on this being a story or the fact that this guy shot her in cold blood after any threat had passed. He should be jailed, as should the other burglar. This isn't the wild ######ing west. We live in a civilized society where we don't allow people to shoot other people just because they've been wronged. You need to actually be in danger. This old man was no longer in danger.

no he was in danger he came home and got attacked and was injured (broken collar bone)

 

adrenaline going its hard to know how a person is going to react when the situation is on them

 

Im amazed he managed to hit 1 of them and had enough sense to not spray bullets into the neighborhood

 

[adrynalyne]

I personally cannot think of one reason why anybody except the military, law enforcement / bodyguards, farmers and possibly a few other specialised sectors should have guns but hey you Americans decided a long time ago that it's your divine right to do so, can't argue with that, it's not as if you have any major issues with regular mass shootings.

 Agreed.  Anyone else should just let themselves be killed by criminals. 

[techbeck]

no he was in danger he came home and got attacked and was injured (broken collar bone)

 

 

They people were fleeing, aka running away, aka leaving the area, aka not going to be near the guy.  He was in no danger at that point.  And people care argue for and against criminals coming back to finish the job....that is just assumptions at this point.

[thejohnnyq]

Im sure the woman with child was far more dangerous than her male accomplice.

 

I think this was more  a case that he wanted some revenge.

 

She lied about being pregnant, and it was not the first time making the claim while robbing people.    If you commit a crime you are chancing injury, get violent and you are only asking for it.

 

The scum bags have robbed several people's homes and is believed to have robbed this guy in the past.  I really get tired of anti-gun nuts who fall for the offender.  The offender created the situation, and paid the price.

[techbeck]

I personally cannot think of one reason why anybody except the military, law enforcement / bodyguards, farmers and possibly a few other specialised sectors should have guns but hey you Americans decided a long time ago that it's your divine right to do so, can't argue with that, it's not as if you have any major issues with regular mass shootings.

 

People have been known to go on killing sprees with knives or vehicles.  A gun really is not the issue here and this kind of thing is not limited to America.   I think that more education needs to be done around owning a weapon and some people should not have them, but any weapon can be used for mass killings.

She lied about being pregnant, and it was not the first time making the claim while robbing people. 

 

Where does it say she lied?  Last I saw, an autopsy was going to be performed to determine.  Even if she was lying, saying dont shoot is pretty much giving up.  And then you have her running away scared

 

The scum bags have robbed several people's homes and is believed to have robbed this guy in the past.  I really get tired of anti-gun nuts who fall for the offender.  The offender created the situation, and paid the price.

 

 

That has no bearing on this case.  Believed and actually 100 percent proof of something is completely different. 

[spenser.d]

no he was in danger he came home and got attacked and was injured (broken collar bone)

adrenaline going its hard to know how a person is going to react when the situation is on them

Im amazed he managed to hit 1 of them and had enough sense to not spray bullets into the neighborhood

It sucks that he got hurt but by the time he had his gun and was shooting he wasn't in danger anymore. Nothing else that happened previously matters.

[Lizardslap]

It sucks that he got hurt but by the time he had his gun and was shooting he wasn't in danger anymore. Nothing else that happened previously matters.

the only reason the danger passed was because he went and got his gun I would not pull a gun/ get a gun unless I was going to use it.      its very illegal to scare people with a gun

 

 

either way its been a stimulating conversation

[spenser.d]

its very illegal to scare people with a gun

So its not okay to get your gun out to get burglars to leave but its just fine as long as you're going to shoot them? You must be joking.

[chrisj1968]

Wasn't there a case not too long ago where a homeowner shot someone in the back, as in they were running away? The pregnancy doesn't really enter in to it for me, it would be the use of a firearm when there doesn't appear to be any danger present - at least according to the article.

 

Sorry. here in nevada, someone breaks into your home or enters illegally, are free game. if they run out of your house however, you have to let them go. but when they breach the threshold of your home, through door or windows.. nail em. 

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Sorry. here in nevada, someone breaks into your home or enters illegally, are free game. if they run out of your house however, you have to let them go. but when they breach the threshold of your home, through door or windows.. nail em.

I don't think we're disagreeing here. The article states that they were running away, he should have let them go and phoned the police.

[Lizardslap]

So its not okay to get your gun out to get burglars to leave but its just fine as long as you're going to shoot them? You must be joking.

why are you going for a gun if you dont intend to use there not a scare device theres plenty of other things to grab if you want to scare people like a knife or w/e.      theres a reason you went for the gun and it was not to scare them

 

 

you can say differnt but when push comes to shove its not gonna be me who ends up dead if i can help it

[+Warwagon MVC]

When I read this ... this is the 1st thing I thought of.

 

 

That being said I think they should losen the law. You break into someones house, they can shoot you dead how ever they see fit.

if they want to shoot you in the

 

Head - Pass

Back - Pass

Knee caps then head - pass

Start from the toes up - pass

 

May then people will think twice before they break into someones house.

[chrisj1968]

I don't think we're disagreeing here. The article states that they were running away, he should have let them go and phoned the police.

Yeah we agree. I had to study the law when I moved here, if they make it out the door I have to let them go. but if they are inside..they might end up pushing up daisies. to me, if they are armed..I would take the shot. being that, if they were to get away, they'd more than likely return or haunt and harm someone else in their home

[eddman]

The old guy used deadly force which is mostly prohibited.  See above quote.  Of course the old guy can say he was concerned for his life regardless if he actually felt that way, or uses it as an excuse to get off.

Seems you ignored all the other links and just picked one single court ruling to fit your argument; also right there it says "most cases", meaning not all.

 

Anyhow, this is not murder, but manslaughter.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Yeah we agree. I had to study the law when I moved here, if they make it out the door I have to let them go. but if they are inside..they might end up pushing up daisies. to me, if they are armed..I would take the shot. being that, if they were to get away, they'd more than likely return or haunt and harm someone else in their home

And according to the law of Nevada, you would be in your right if they were on your property. But this is now arguing a hypothetical situation rather than the article itself.

[techbeck]

Seems you ignored all the other links and just picked one single court ruling to fit your argument; also right there it says "most cases", meaning not all.

Anyhow, this is not murder, but manslaughter.

I quoted the link that was posted. And I guess you ignored where I said mostly. I never said all cases

[Lamp0]

Here in Michigan and a great many other states they're toast. Its recognized that criminals who break off an attack often do return to finish the job soon after.

Law enforcement sees this all the time, where the perps wait until the cops leave after taking a report and a second attack commences. No need to return the tactical advantage to them.

 

What about the likely hood of revenge after killing an attacker? Last thing you'd want is have an armed gang come to your home for retribution.

[Dot Matrix]

Don't want shot at? Don't break into people's homes. Simple.

[Lamp0]

Don't want shot at? Don't break into people's homes. Simple.

 

yea or at least if you're going to brake in, bring a gun.

[Xerino]

Is it just me, or does this guy seem proud that he shot a gal in the back.. I mean he really doesnt seem to care at all he took her life... I mean she was unarmed and running away..