Support NeoGAF

[OJdaKiller]

Both parties made extremely unfortunate decisions in this case, but I'm going to have to place the majority of the blame on the robbers. .

Both parties made bad choices but one was provoked while the other was not.

Another thief off the street who plans to victimize and assault elderly people..Sounds good to me.

An old man who reacted to being a multiple victim after being assaulted will now spend time in jail, waste a bunch of money on a legal defense..Not the way he was planning on spending his retirement...Not something he deserved. The heat of the moment got to him and legally he's screwed..Morally/ethically, he can rest easy.

Sometimes you find trouble and other times trouble finds you...The result is the same unfortunately.

 

[Zabuza]

Both parties made bad choices but one was provoked while the other was not.

Another thief off the street who plans to victimize and assault elderly people..Sounds good to me.

An old man who reacted to being a multiple victim after being assaulted will now spend time in jail, waste a bunch of money on a legal defense..Not the way he was planning on spending his retirement...Not something he deserved. The heat of the moment got to him and legally he's screwed..Morally/ethically, he can rest easy.

Sometimes you find trouble and other times trouble finds you...The result is the same unfortunately.

Can't agree with what you're saying here. He killed her in cold blood. Read his quote and you tell me he can rest easy morally/ethically.

 

[ICKE]

He was looking for a reason to shoot that gun. Screw the bf too for letting his pregnant gf even get into that situation.

These thieves had been in his house several times and this time assaulted him. Imagine being there with broken bones and what not, then grabbing a gun while adrenaline is running. All bets are off at that point and you might behave irrationally. Still doesn't make it right but I don't see it as murder.

 

[hiroshawn]

These thieves had been in his house several times and this time assaulted him. Imagine being there with broken bones and what not, then grabbing a gun while adrenaline is running. All bets are off at that point and you might behave irrationally. Still doesn't make it right but I don't see it as murder.

Exactly what I'm thinking.

 

[nateeasy]

Dont start none.

 

[ishibear]

All that and yet not a single mention of the choice of the mother to wear her unborn child like a bulletproof vest...

Clearly you can't read. "It's wrong to break into another person's home...", flew over your head didn't it?

Obviously being pregnant and potentially putting an unborn baby in harms way didn't cross the mother's mind when she robbed a person's home multiple times.

She didn't deserve to be murdered, but by entering a person's home, you're asking for whatever trouble you receive. Can't expect the person who you're stealing from to have remorse after continuously robbing them.

"It's wrong to break into another person's home...".

Stop with the selective reading and actually READ what you're quoting, mmkay?

 

[Glorified G]

That's fine but would you chase them down the street and shoot them in the back as they ran away? I would think at that point calling the cops would be enough, there's no more danger at that point.

According to him they jumped him prior and broke his collar bone, and his home has been invaded twice before. He's been consistently in danger and unless he hasn't been calling the cops before than I don't blame putting the end to threat once and for all.

 

[Shao Kahn on the Lawn]

I'd love to see you trot out a definition of opinion that makes this post make any sense whatsoever.

I'm sure you would, given your clear inability to grasp the very simple fact hat morality is wholly subjective in the first place and opinions, by definition, are considerations/judgments on situations that themselves are not necessarily based on fact.

And I responded to that. He was legally and morally wrong as they did not present a deadly threat to him as they were fleeing. A lone citizen does not have the right to end anyone's life unless it is to save their own life or the life of another. What they "deserve" is absolutely immaterial, and that they were a threat in some potential future sense is never justification for in-the-moment deadly force.

1. Legally Wrong - Fact
2. Morally Wrong - Opinion
3. Moral justification for use of deadly force - Opinion

I know your stance. You know mine. I don't see this discussion going much further in any constructive way.

Clearly you can't read. "It's wrong to break into another person's home...", flew over your head didn't it?

"It's wrong to break into another person's home...".

Stop with the selective reading and actually READ what you're quoting, mmkay?

I'm quite capable of reading. Are you? You didn't say a word about the woman's decision to put her fetus in that position. Whether or not it's wrong to break into another person's home has nothing to do with whether or not a fetus is involved. She made a decision to commit multiple felonies while supposedly carrying a child. Why should the victim of those felonies care any more about the fetus than she did when she was making the decision to commit those crimes?

 

[B-Dubs]

Both parties made bad choices but one was provoked while the other was not.

Another thief off the street who plans to victimize and assault elderly people..Sounds good to me.

An old man who reacted to being a multiple victim after being assaulted will now spend time in jail, waste a bunch of money on a legal defense..Not the way he was planning on spending his retirement...Not something he deserved. The heat of the moment got to him and legally he's screwed..Morally/ethically, he can rest easy.

Sometimes you find trouble and other times trouble finds you...The result is the same unfortunately.

I gotta disagree. If he shoots them while they're robbing his place, then sure he's totally justified. That's not what happened, he chased them down the street and shot the slower one of the two in the back. By that point the tables had turned enough that it's no longer justified. He was in no danger, he was chasing them down the street with his gun.

 

[statham]

I don't condone the murder, but begging that she was pregnant after robbing him? Fuck that noise.

and assaulting him breaking his collar bone. and they continued the robbing while he was there until he got the gun. Thats my conflict. they should have ran away as soon as they saw him, instead they tackled him, both of them. would they have killed him after the robbing if he didn't get the gun? if he didn't shoot would they come back to finish the job since he could ID them? I would not shot if I was him, I don't know, If I was a Jury, I don't think I would find him guilty on the little we know.

 

[MIMIC]

If I come to a person house and shoot them that's murder. If I get into a bar fight and kill the guy that's manslaughter.

I thought you were going to argue that he was sufficiently provoked and not just to "stop a thief" (to argue voluntary manslaughter). Those aren't the legal definitions for either.

 

[remnant]

So she told him she was pregnant after they broke his collarbone?

 

[TheRedSnifit]

It's tempting to compare this to that time where some guy executed some woman who broke into his house, but it seems a bit more justified this time, given how the thieves were violently assaulting him. A good lawyer could probably turn this into voluntary manslaughter.

I thought you were going to argue that he was sufficiently provoked and not just to "stop a thief" (to argue voluntary manslaughter). Those aren't the legal definitions for either.

They broke his collarbone for no reason at all (the dude's eighty), and then when he pulled a gun [i[without[/i] firing they shot him again; one could argue that most reasonable people would respond violently. Of course, the whole "I shot her while she was fleeing LOL" thing doesn't help his case.

 

[FinalStageBoss]

Can't say I feel bad tbh, robbed him as many times as they did, shits going to go down.

 

[Amon37]

Rob and hurt an old man and scream pregnant when he retaliates.

I'm glad that kid wasn't born to these assholes.

 

[KHarvey16]

I'm sure you would, given your clear inability to grasp the very simple fact hat morality is wholly subjective in the first place and opinions, by definition, are considerations/judgments on situations that themselves are not necessarily based on fact.

1. Legally Wrong - Fact
2. Morally Wrong - Opinion
3. Moral justification for use of deadly force - Opinion

I know your stance. You know mine. I don't see this discussion going much further in any constructive way.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret - this whole forum and all of the threads in it are for sharing opinions. You shared yours, I told you it didn't match the law and, on top of that, I disagree for reason x, y and z. How you took that to mean I didn't understand what it is to have an opinion I'll apparently never know, as your post has disappointed me by doing precisely nothing to change that. If you feel like your stance isn't robust enough to stand up to discussion, maybe in the future you shouldn't share it on a discussion board.

 

[Cmerrill]

Canada has laws allowing the use of deadly force if the occupant feels their life is in danger. No one has to have a gun or shoot at anyone.

If you shoot someone in your home in Canada, you're probably going to be in shit, because:

A) In Canada all firearms have to locked and stored separately from ammunition, and they will want to know how you had to time to unlock your weapon and load it.
B) You can't kill/shoot someone if you had "alternative" methods/measures could have been taken, you can only protect yourself from death/imminent attack. You can't kill/shoot to protect property, it's fucked up. Once you shoot someone, you're in big trouble.

There are too many grey area's in our self defense laws, it's caused a many legal troubles for Canadians in the past.

 

[Abounder]

Zero sympathy here for the intruders. Abusing an 80 year old man should get you killed.

 

[B-Dubs]

and assaulting him breaking his collar bone. and they continued the robbing while he was there until he got the gun. Thats my conflict. they should have ran away as soon as they saw him, instead they tackled him, both of them. would they have killed him after the robbing if he didn't get the gun? if he didn't shoot would they come back to finish the job since he could ID them? I would not shot if I was him, but I don't think hes totally guilty either.

He could have called the cops at that point instead of chasing them down the street though. Up until he's chasing them down the street I am perfectly ok with him shooting them, once you reach that point? Call the cops, give them a description. The cops are going to take robbers who assault people during the break-ins pretty seriously, he should have just left it to them at that point.

 

[Purexed]

That's fine but would you chase them down the street and shoot them in the back as they ran away? I would think at that point calling the cops would be enough, there's no more danger at that point.

Disagree, what's to stop them from coming back, next time with a weapon? I feel like this conversation has become too academic versus being grounded in reality.

It's amazing that we ask law abiding citizens to follow laws to perfection, when you have criminals playing by completely different rules.

"Sure I'm dead now, but I sure feel honorable about following the laws until my dying breath..."

 

[djplaeskool]

Damn.
That shit was Ice Cold.

Given the situation, sympathy was optional.
Dude's 80 y.o. That changes the landscape on how potentially vindictive action will be handled.

 

[Shao Kahn on the Lawn]

He could have called the cops at that point instead of chasing them down the street though. Up until he's chasing them down the street I am perfectly ok with him shooting them, once you reach that point? Call the cops, give them a description. The cops are going to take robbers who assault people during the break-ins pretty seriously, he should have just left it to them at that point.

How many robberies would you endure before you came to the conclusion that the police likely weren't going prevent another from happening?

 

[MIMIC]

Wait, so they attacked him during the break-in? I guess a lawyer could argue voluntary manslaughter then (and not let it be murder)

 

[Valtýr]

Robbery does not justify murder. This wasn't self defense.

 

[Toxi]

Disagree, what's to stop them from coming back, next time with a weapon? I feel like this conversation has become too academic versus being grounded in reality.

It's amazing that we ask law abiding citizens to follow laws to perfection, when you have criminals playing by completely different rules.

"Sure I'm dead now, but I sure feel honorable about following the laws until my dying breath..."

Considering that the old man is a criminal, this is a pretty shitty argument.

 

["God's Beard!"]

That's fine but would you chase them down the street and shoot them in the back as they ran away? I would think at that point calling the cops would be enough, there's no more danger at that point.

No more danger? They kept coming back to rob and attack him. They're clearly still a danger.

"oh god I'm being attacked!"
phew they're gone, I'm safe!
"oh god I'm being attacked!"
phew they're gone, I'm safe!

At what point do you stop being stupid and realize these people aren't done?

All that and yet not a single mention of the choice of the mother to wear her unborn child like a bulletproof vest...

Thank you. You don't get to be a victim of society when you make the conscious decision to place your unborn child in harm's way. People have responsibility for their actions. I'm not going to start crying for someone because their life may or may not have been hard and taking the easy way out with violent crime backfired.

 

[B-Dubs]

Disagree, what's to stop them from coming back, next time with a weapon? I feel like this conversation has become too academic versus being grounded in reality.

It's amazing that we ask law abiding citizens to follow laws to perfection, when you have criminals playing by completely different rules.

"Sure I'm dead now, but I sure feel honorable about following the laws until my dying breath..."

The cops aren't going to just write off two robbers who go around assaulting old men, that's a danger to the public at large and they'd have been looking for them had he called the cops up like he should have after chasing them off. He didn't need to chase them down the street.

 

[NimbusD]

This mindset not only confuses me, it legitimately scares me.

She was of no threat to him at that point in time. Is the punishment for robbery death? No it is not. And even if it were he has no right to carry out the sentence. This is ridiculous, it is not okay to kill someone for breaking into your home if they are not posing an immediate physical threat to you.

Not only that but he didn't even bother to shoot to subdue them, but shot multiple times with the intent to kill.

 

[KHarvey16]

It's tempting to compare this to that time where some guy executed some woman who broke into his house, but it seems a bit more justified this time, given how the thieves were violently assaulting him. A good lawyer could probably turn this into voluntary manslaughter.

He aimed his gun and shot with intent to kill. That's clear from the interview. Manslaughter isn't an appropriate charge.

 

[Kacho]

Wait, so they attacked him during the break-in? I guess a lawyer could argue voluntary manslaughter then (and not let it be murder)

Yep. Broke his collar bone and left him there to watch as they robbed him.

 

[BronsonLee]

Stuff worth pointing out:

For those arguing that it's rather heartless to not take into account them hurting him/potentially coming back armed, etc..

1: If they had been arrested, they would've gotten more jail time for that.
2: It'd be rather difficult for them to come back armed if they were arrested
3: I'll go out on a limb and say he could provide police with a pretty decent description of the burglars, and also since they were running down a damn street/not driving away in a car, if he called quick enough, they likely would have been found.

And for those arguing about whether it's potentially manslaughter/murder:

It doesn't matter. If he gets convicted on anything, the odds are more in favor of him passing away in prison. He is 80, after all.

Also ffs it's not manslaughter I can't understand why anyone would think that here

 

[Toxi]

[QUOTE="God's Beard!";122548021]No more danger? They kept coming back to rob and attack him. They're clearly still a danger.

"oh god I'm being attacked!"
phew they're gone, I'm safe!
"oh god I'm being attacked!"
phew they're gone, I'm safe!

At what point do you stop being stupid and realize these people aren't done?[/QUOTE]
If he saw them on the street the next day, would he be justified shooting them?

 

[Slurmer]

I gotta disagree. If he shoots them while they're robbing his place, then sure he's totally justified. That's not what happened, he chased them down the street and shot the slower one of the two in the back. By that point the tables had turned enough that it's no longer justified. He was in no danger, he was chasing them down the street with his gun.

Do we know the details of the "chase"? I'm guessing that he shot them right outside his home. I kind of doubt the 80 year old man was racing these two down, and then managed to drag the woman a long ways back to his home with a broke collar bone.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

He aimed his gun and shot with intent to kill. That's clear from the interview. Manslaughter isn't an appropriate charge.

Voluntary manslaughter. It's a thing.

 

[Friggz]

2 people broke into this guys house before. this time they attack him and in an effort to escape the guy shoots the female dead on the spot. Guess that guy will think twice about going back to that house. Now the guy doesnt have to worry about them coming back and potentially killing him. Eliminate the threat on the spot. I have no problems with what happened.

 

[Spinluck]

Robbery does not justify murder. This wasn't self defense.

I agree, but they should have never fucked with that old man.

I do not think that woman deserved what she got, the guy shot to kill.

 

[hiroshawn]

Yep. Broke his collar bone and left him there to watch as they robbed him.

Even temporary insanity. His bones were broken and the adrenaline was pumping through his him. The real question is what is the accomplice being charged with?

 

["God's Beard!"]

If he saw them on the street the next day, would he be justified shooting them?

I'm not saying he's justified. I just understand why he acted the way he did and I don't feel particularly sympathetic to the robbers.

Should the old man be arrested? Probably, yeah. But I'm not going to pretend what happened to the pregnant lady was a tragedy, either.

 

[BronsonLee]

Voluntary manslaughter. It's a thing.

You could probably make that case if it happened in the home, it becomes much harder since he allegedly followed them outside.

And that interview tears that all to pieces anyways

Even temporary insanity. His bones were broken and the adrenaline was pumping through his him. The real question is what is the accomplice being charged with?

The fuck, this isn't Raising The Bar

 

[Yaboosh]

He aimed his gun and shot with intent to kill. That's clear from the interview. Manslaughter isn't an appropriate charge.

Manslaughter doesn't have to be an accident.

 

[KHarvey16]

Voluntary manslaughter. It's a thing.

Malice aforethought makes it murder, and heat-of-the-moment wouldn't apply since this person was fleeing.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Wow, apparently the couple had robbed the house two times before.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

What about three

 

[Suikoguy]

So many people seem to forget that people who rob houses, the majority of the time, are not doing so because it's fun. For some reason there is a mentality that people cease being human as soon as they commit a crime... I don't understand where or why this disconnect occurs, but it's really scary.

Secondly, I do wonder if the murderer did bother to call the police during these previous alleged incidents. There is no information on that yet.

 

[Slurmer]

Even temporary insanity. His bones were broken and the adrenaline was pumping through his him. The real question is what is the accomplice being charged with?

Nothing yet. He hasn't been caught.

So many people seem to forget that people who rob houses, the majority of the time, are not doing so because it's fun. For some reason there is a mentality that people cease being human as soon as they commit a crime... I don't understand where or why this disconnect occurs, but it's really scary.

Well, to be fair, you're sympathizing with criminals with purely hypothetical arguments. One could also say elderly people being robbed multiple times (and attacked) may act extremely irrationally due to missing medications, senility, etc. Those arguments aren't really serviceable defenses of this individual case, since we don't have that information.

 

[Shao Kahn on the Lawn]

Even temporary insanity. His bones were broken and the adrenaline was pumping through his him. The real question is what is the accomplice being charged with?

He'll likely be charged with whatever the shooter is charged with (Or worse). Accomplices can and are often held responsible for the deaths of others during the commission of crimes.

 

[CountAntonius]

If he had got the gun while they were still in the house and shot them face to face as they still pleaded for their life unarmed would people still be calling this guy a cold blooded murderer that should be in prison?

So many people seem to forget that people who rob houses, the majority of the time, are not doing so because it's fun. For some reason there is a mentality that people cease being human as soon as they commit a crime... I don't understand where or why this disconnect occurs, but it's really scary.

Secondly, I do wonder if the murderer did bother to call the police during these previous alleged incidents. There is no information on that yet.

I don't think that's what happens at all. I think they choose to instead focus on the fact that the criminal wasn't exactly thinking of their victims humanity much in the first place.

 

[Kacho]

He'll likely be charged with whatever the shooter is charged with (Or worse). Accomplices can and are often held responsible for the deaths of others during the commission of crimes.

Yeah, like that bank robber in California who got charged with the death of their hostage even though it was the cops who killed her.

 

[MIMIC]

Just watched the video (I initially just read the info in the OP and the other link wasn't working). It's....quite candid.

But ugh...such a tragic and unfortunate incident. Wish he just called the police the first time around.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Malice aforethought makes it murder, and heat-of-the-moment wouldn't apply since this person was fleeing.

Define "malice aforethought". Is there any indication that he had been waiting in his home for them or something?

And you're voluntary manslaughter with justified homicide. If some guy pulls a knife on me and I shoot him, it's justified homicide. If I come home shoot you while you're sleeping with my life, it's (maybe) voluntary manslaughter. It all depends on whether or not the defense can show that a reasonable person would become "emotionally or mentally disturbed".

And that interview tears that all to pieces anyways

Like I said, it harms his case.

 

[mrkgoo]

Have any of you actually been robbed?

The last home I had was robbed 3 times in the same month by the same person.

The stuff I don't care about really, but it's not that that gets you. You become paranoid. Regular life becomes fear.

My house was alarmed and would call me when it went off - it came to the point that I feared phone calls, wondering if it was someone breaking into my home.

It's no way to live. We had to leave our home.


Even to this day, I've become sort of OCD about home security.

Not saying death is an appropriate response, nor that the guy was justified, but robbery isn't just about "property".