Support NeoGAF

[-PXG-]

I know I will get shit for it, but fuck it. I'm not pro gun, right wing, or any of that shit at all (quite the opposite) but if you're gonna be dumb enough to rob or invade someone's house, expect that person to defend it at all costs. How was this dude (an elderly guy at that) supposed to know these people weren't going to hurt him, kill him or come back at another time to do either? He wasn't going to risk it. I don't blame him. No sympathy for attempting to break in and rob someone. Fuck 'em

Of course it's easy for someone behind a screen to judge, talk shit and say he didn't think clearly in the situation. I don't know, I can imagine it's hard to have a clear, objective, diplomatic frame of mind if someone breaks into your goddamn home, trying to steal your shit and, God forbid,might hurt you too. Yeah, lemme see how calm any of you or myself would be in that same situation.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

None of this matters anyway. It all depends on if the DA wants to throw hands or not. This situation is loaded.

This. So much this. In NY he'd get nailed to a wall. Shit there's a guy in NY on trial for shooting a guy in the back and the guy who broke into the house is seen on camera with a gun and pointing it at the homeowner as he runs away. Still no dice. Occupant is fucked.

Can't shoot someone in the back here, lol. Even if they have a gun.

I know I will get shit for it, but fuck it. I'm not pro gun, right wing, or any of that shit at all (quite the opposite) but if you're gonna be dumb enough to rob or invade someone's house, expect that person to defend it at all costs. How was this dude (an elderly guy at that) supposed to know these people weren't going to hurt him, kill him or come back at another time to do either? He wasn't going to risk it. I don't blame him. No sympathy for attempting to break in and rob someone. Fuck 'em

Of course it's easy for someone behind a screen to judge, talk shit and say he didn't think clearly in the situation. I don't know, I can imagine it's hard to have a clear, objective, diplomatic frame of mind if someone breaks into your goddamn home, trying to steal your shit and, God forbid,might hurt you too. Yeah, lemme see how calm any of you or myself would be in that same situation.

In the end I say don't start none won't be none. I ain't got time to throw a pity party for violent criminals.

 

[KHarvey16]

Except in Texas (Post #853), you can kill someone to prevent them from fleeing with your property or someone else's.

The law states it has to be at nighttime, and the shooter must reasonably believe that:

1. The property cannot be protected or recovered any other way and

2. any use of force other than deadly force would expose him or her to a substantial risk of death or grievous bodily injury.

In other words, it isn't as simple as you describe and wouldn't justify this man's actions.

That is the part I have a problem with. What exactly is the act? One might argue that the whole situation could be percieved as the act. You cant control rage and anger.

One can argue anything, but in that case one would be wrong (legally speaking).

 

[DSKMan]

She wasn't killed in the act and that's precisely the problem. Thankfully his actions will never be considered legal in any first world legal system.

So you think if you catch someone raping a loved one and they stop, it shouldn't be legal to shoot them dead as they flee? Since they act has stopped.

 

[Ol No Bones]

No it's not, and I explained why. Go and read the whole discussion from however many pages ago that was.

Yeah I did. The points you made were just as inconsistent as the original point and didn't begin to address the underlying principle.

Just as a side point Roe v wade might prohibit abortion after viability but in practice this is ignored or misunderstood as evidenced by the thousands of abortion survivors.

It is inconsistent to feel remorse for a baby in the womb and still have the moral stance that abortion is ok. Do we base our feelings on whether the mother intended to keep it? She could have gone and killed the baby the next day. Who cares?

 

[Stinkles]

Um...im not sure how to feel about this.

It's pretty clear to me how a person should feel about this.

 

[KHarvey16]

So you think if you catch someone raping a loved one and they stop, it shouldn't be legal to shoot them dead as they flee? Since they act has stopped.

As they flee? Of course it shouldn't be legal. Why would anyone want to legislate your ability to exact revenge?

 

[BronsonLee]

This. So much this. In NY he'd get nailed to a wall. Shit there's a guy in NY on trial for shooting a guy in the back and the guy who broke into the house is seen on camera with a gun and pointing it at the homeowner as he runs away. Still no dice. Occupant is fucked.

Can't shoot someone in the back here, lol. Even if they have a gun.

Wait, what is this now?! Do you have any articles? This one intrigues me.

 

[T.O.P]

I know I will get shit for it, but fuck it. I'm not pro gun, right wing, or any of that shit at all (quite the opposite) but if you're gonna be dumb enough to rob or invade someone's house, expect that person to defend it at all costs. How was this dude (an elderly guy at that) supposed to know these people weren't going to hurt him, kill him or come back at another time to do either? He wasn't going to risk it. I don't blame him. No sympathy for attempting to break in and rob someone. Fuck 'em

Of course it's easy for someone behind a screen to judge, talk shit and say he didn't think clearly in the situation. I don't know, I can imagine it's hard to have a clear, objective, diplomatic frame of mind if someone breaks into your goddamn home, trying to steal your shit and, God forbid,might hurt you too. Yeah, lemme see how calm any of you or myself would be in that same situation.

100% this

 

[Hero Prinny]

It's easy to sit here and say point blank he shouldn't have shot her. But he was an old 80 year old man who just got jumped by two people, after that it would be very hard for anyone to not want to take some sort of action. You really aren't in your proper state of mind after being traumatized like that.

And why is a pregnant woman robbing and jumping 80 year old men? She wasn't thinking about her child's safety then but all of a sudden she wants sympathy when the tables are turned. I have no sympathy for her whatsoever.

I agree with this 100%
Also agree with pxg

 

[KHarvey16]

Yeah I did. The points you made were just as inconsistent as the original point and didn't begin to address the underlying principle.

Just as a side point Roe v wade might prohibit abortion after viability but in practice this is ignored or misunderstood as evidenced by the thousands of abortion survivors.

It is inconsistent to feel remorse for a baby in the womb and still have the moral stance that abortion is ok. Do we base our feelings on whether the mother intended to keep it? She could have gone and killed the baby the next day. Who cares?

She didn't make the choice and it wasn't performed by a physician exercising his or her right to treat a patient (another important point in Roe v Wade). There is no inconsistency if you understand the underlying legal justification.

 

[GungHo]

I don't think it's okay to shoot fleeing people. That's not self-defense, not even with their history of repeated robberies/assaults.

That being said, if the guy reached/had his gun and the people were still attacking him in his house, I really wouldn't have a problem with him shooting in actual self defense, regardless of their own recidivism. The guy doesn't have to get beaten to death to decide they're going to beat him to death.

I don't want people to lose their lives and I personally wouldn't ever shoot at someone over TV, cash or jewelry (I'd tell them they can have it all, but they need to leave me, my wife, and my animals alone), but if they come for me or someone I love, they've crossed the line of me worrying about how they got there to me worrying about how I'm getting through it. Luckily, I'm not an 80 year old man and I have more tools in the box than a handgun.

They robbed the same fellow three times? Must've had some nice knick-knacks.

Or they just figured he was weak, old, and easily beaten. Until he comes back with a gun, he's prey and they aren't begging him for mercy.

 

[BobLoblaw]

Dude was 80 years old. He more than likely could not defend himself against the pregnant woman... let alone the man. So he is supposed to take an ass whooping/ beating and let them steal from him and not do anything? I know laws are laws.. .but give me a break.

One could argue that beating an 80 year old man and stealing from him is just cause for him to bust a cap in her ass.

One could also argue that you could be considered morally reprehensible. Was he killed? Was he raped? Did someone pull a weapon on him? No. Someone knocked him down in a scuffle in his home and fled. He callously chased one of them down and shot them in the back after they pled for their life. If you think that's ok, then you have a pretty messed up sense of right and wrong.

 

[Bsigg12]

Have the authorities updated on if she was actually pregnant?

 

[-PXG-]

100% this

Annnnnnd this is the third fucking time. Cops clearly haven't done shit. Oh hell no. You come into my home, not once, not twice, but three damn times, oh... It's gonna get poppin. I wouldn't give a fuck at that point. Anyone would be scared in that situation and have every right to defend their home. Pregnant, running away.. What the fuck ever. You rob me three times and threaten my house hold, you're gonna pay one way or another.

Of course sympathy/ bleeding heart GAF defends this shit. Unbelievable.

 

[GungHo]

Was he killed?

Kinda difficult for him to decide to defend himself if this has happened.

 

[Nickle]

I know I will get shit for it, but fuck it. I'm not pro gun, right wing, or any of that shit at all (quite the opposite) but if you're gonna be dumb enough to rob or invade someone's house, expect that person to defend it at all costs. How was this dude (an elderly guy at that) supposed to know these people weren't going to hurt him, kill him or come back at another time to do either? He wasn't going to risk it. I don't blame him. No sympathy for attempting to break in and rob someone. Fuck 'em

Of course it's easy for someone behind a screen to judge, talk shit and say he didn't think clearly in the situation. I don't know, I can imagine it's hard to have a clear, objective, diplomatic frame of mind if someone breaks into your goddamn home, trying to steal your shit and, God forbid,might hurt you too. Yeah, lemme see how calm any of you or myself would be in that same situation.

I'd like to see someone actually refute this. We can all pretend like we would calmly incapacitate the criminals while saying a witty catch-phrase, but that's not how the real world works.

 

[goldenpp72]

One could also argue that you could be considered morally reprehensible. Was he killed? Was he raped? Did someone pull a weapon on him? No. Someone knocked him down in a scuffle in his home and fled. He callously chased one of them down and shot them in the back after they pled for their life. If you think that's ok, then you have a pretty messed up sense of right and wrong.

Is this what is considered the actual story or just your way of twisting it to make a point?

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Wait, what is this now?! Do you have any articles? This one intrigues me.

Sure. Here it is.

And this. In this article it states a pellet gun was recovered.

 

[y2dvd]

I didn't have the detail earlier that they broke into his home before and broke his collar bone. That does change my perspective a bit. Did the intruders push him down and that's how he had it broke? What if they knock him down again and this time he lands on his head? Who knows what thoughts and what kinda adrenaline he was in when the intruders were fleeing. I have less sympathy for the girl now.

 

[AbsolutBro]

Sure. Here it is.

And this. In this article it states a pellet gun was recovered.

>Youssef Abdel-Gawad
>NYC

Yup, he's fucked. Ridiculous. Just fucking ridiculous.

 

[BruiserBear]

Do we know if the woman was actually pregnant?

As they flee? Of course it shouldn't be legal. Why would anyone want to legislate your ability to exact revenge?

The problem with this sort of thing is trying to get into the head of someone that has been traumatized. It is genuinely easy to say from the comfort of your own home right now that "I would react like this", but in that moment you might not be thinking the exact same way.

 

[TelluricTokoro]

Yeah I don't have sympathy for this woman. She took a gamble with her life, she lost. Whether or not the old man was justified in his behavior, it wouldn't have happened if she hadn't robbed him three times in a row.

People need to be held accountable for their actions. If he sees jail time for this, then he has to do the time. But I'm not gonna call him cold-blooded or psychopathic for this. It seems stupid to. The insane ones were the robbers thinking they could rob the same person several times over and nothing would happen.

Them's the breaks when you're a criminal.

 

[KHarvey16]

Do we know if the woman was actually pregnant?



The problem with this sort of thing is trying to get into the head of someone that has been traumatized. It is genuinely easy to say from the comfort of your own home right now that "I would react like this", but in that moment you might not be thinking the exact same way.

He asked about legality. It is not legal to shoot someone as they flee after raping a loved one, and it should not be.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

>Youssef Abdel-Gawad
>NYC

Yup, he's fucked. Ridiculous. Just fucking ridiculous.

Happened on Long Island. But yep. LI is the most segregated suburb in the US.

 

[AbsolutBro]

Happened on Long Island. But yep. LI is the most segregated suburb in the US.

I probably should have gone with "NYPD", but yeah. It's pathetic that if this was "John Smith" he probably wouldn't be where Youssef is now.

 

[T.O.P]

Sure. Here it is.

And this. In this article it states a pellet gun was recovered.

wtf, seriously WTF

manslaughter my ass

 

[Ol No Bones]

She didn't make the choice and it wasn't performed by a physician exercising his or her right to treat a patient (another important point in Roe v Wade). There is no inconsistency if you understand the underlying legal justification.

You don't get it. Ok, some people were expressing extra disgust based on the fact that she may have been pregnant. There may or may not be a legal inconsistency. I'm addressing the moral inconsistency. Either that is just some tissue that she could choose to have "treated" or not. Its like expressing more outrage because a woman that got shot had a tumor. The tumor is not relevant at all to the murder and wouldn't add any disgust to the murder. Who cares if she had a tumor when she got murdered? Its not consistent for anyone who supports abortion to have any added disgust that a woman happened to be pregnant when she was killed. If the baby had the inherent value that we associate with life they wouldn't be ok with abortion.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

I know I will get shit for it, but fuck it. I'm not pro gun, right wing, or any of that shit at all (quite the opposite) but if you're gonna be dumb enough to rob or invade someone's house, expect that person to defend it at all costs. How was this dude (an elderly guy at that) supposed to know these people weren't going to hurt him, kill him or come back at another time to do either? He wasn't going to risk it. I don't blame him. No sympathy for attempting to break in and rob someone. Fuck 'em
.

I would normally agree. The problem is that they were already out of the house and fleeing. So, yeah, the guy obviously knew at that point that they weren't going to kill him. Whether they were going to back or not is irrelevant; that's for the police to deal with.

 

[BronsonLee]

Sure. Here it is.

And this. In this article it states a pellet gun was recovered.

Oh good lord.

I guess their argument is they don't know if the burglars fired? And that it was just a pellet gun?

Sorry to derail the thread like this for a separate incident, but what the hell

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I probably should have gone with "NYPD", but yeah. It's pathetic that if this was "John Smith" he probably wouldn't be where Youssef is now.

Pretty much.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

At least in Texas you can kill someone for taking your property without your life being in danger. You can even kill someone for taking someone else's property:

http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/

Well then, I stand corrected about Texas. But that just illustrates what I was stating earlier that most states do not allow lethal force in the defense of property, since the article does say it is unique to Texas. (It also illustrates that I do not know enough about Texas law, being a yank and all) But wow....that is kind of messed up. Why hasn't this been challenged in Federal Court yet?

 

[Sanjay]

These quotes from the interview are fucked up.

"I'm a good Christian"

"I shot her twice, she best be dead"

 

[KHarvey16]

You don't get it. Ok, some people were expressing extra disgust based on the fact that she may have been pregnant. There may or may not be a legal inconsistency. I'm addressing the moral inconsistency. Either that is just some tissue that she could choose to have "treated" or not. Its like expressing more outrage because a woman that got shot had a tumor. The tumor is not relevant at all to the murder and wouldn't add any disgust to the murder. Who cares if she had a tumor when she got murdered? Its not consistent for anyone who supports abortion to have any added disgust that a woman happened to be pregnant when she was killed. If the baby had the inherent value that we associate with life they wouldn't be ok with abortion.

People who support a woman's right to choose an abortion do so because, as it's implied, they believe the woman maintains a right to choose. Someone shooting a woman and killing her and the child is clearly not a case of a woman choosing to terminate a pregnancy. This is only difficult if for some reason you want to force it to be difficult. You and others seem desperate to make this an issue.

 

[KHarvey16]

Oh good lord.

I guess their argument is they don't know if the burglars fired? And that it was just a pellet gun?

Sorry to derail the thread like this for a separate incident, but what the hell

The fleeing man was shot in the neighbor's yard.

 

[BronsonLee]

The fleeing man was shot in the neighbor's yard.

Oooh, I missed that part, thanks. That definitely complicates this significantly.

 

[-PXG-]

I would normally agree. The problem is that they were already out of the house and fleeing. So, yeah, the guy obviously knew at that point that they weren't going to kill him. Whether they were going to back or not is irrelevant; that's for the police to deal with.

And the police have done a bang up job the last two times, didn't they. She didn't deserve to die, but I guess that's what happens when you rob someone three times and threaten their home.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Oh good lord.

I guess their argument is they don't know if the burglars fired? And that it was just a pellet gun?

Sorry to derail the thread like this for a separate incident, but what the hell

I mentioned it as a comparison to how home defense laws can vary from location to location.

Like I said there should be a resource for home owners/residents to know exactly what level of force can be used in any given situation. A lot of times people don't KNOW they'll end up with legal problems. Sure we know as we discuss this topic a great deal but it's harder to tell when you just got pummeled in your own home and basically held hostage as people steal your shit.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

I mentioned it as a comparison to how home defense laws can vary from location to location.

Like I said there should be a resource for home owners/residents to know exactly what level of force can be used in any given situation. A lot of times people don't KNOW they'll end up with legal problems. Sure we know as we discuss this topic a great deal but it's harder to tell when you just got pummeled in your own home and basically held hostage as people steal your shit.

There is a resource. The penal code of each and every state is posted online or available at your local library. If you are concerned about legal liability, you can easily access it. That, or ask an attorney.

 

[crazygambit]

They put their own lives at risk. 80 year old guy pretty much has nothing to lose as well. Shitty situation but look...don't fucken rob someone's house.

Pretty much. What are you gonna do to him? Throw him in jail?

 

[VoxPop]

He should have just shot a limb off for each time she robbed him. I think leaving her as a pregnant vegetable is much more satisfactory than killing her. Then proceed to rob her house after.

 

[BronsonLee]

I mentioned it as a comparison to how home defense laws can vary from location to location.

Oh you were totally legit in bringing it up for comparison, I was just super curious about it.

I am also really curious as to what they'll do RE: this situation.

 

[TheChocolateWar]

Oh you were totally legit in bringing it up for comparison, I was just super curious about it.

I am also really curious as to what they'll do RE: this situation.

Well if the prosecutor refuses to file a case, the estate of the baby could bring a wrongful death action against the man.

 

[OriginalNameGuy]

So he should shoot to kill because it's starting to become a nuisance, should he?

He's 80 years old, the police weren't helping, they'd broken his collarbone in a prior robbery and they had targeted him again. Easy to understand why this old guy snapped. Having your broken into isn't some minor thing. People lose sleep out of fear, they go to work knowing when they come back their valuables may be gone.

 

[Ol No Bones]

People who support a woman's right to choose an abortion do so because, as it's implied, they believe the woman maintains a right to choose. Someone shooting a woman and killing her and the child is clearly not a case of a woman choosing to terminate a pregnancy. This is only difficult if for some reason you want to force it to be difficult. You and others seem desperate to make this an issue.

So people who support a woman's supposed right to choose actually do support it knowing that it may actually be a human life. Whether it is a child or not is irrelevant?

See I was always under the impression that the justification was based on the belief that the child in the womb is not a human life therefore it was her right to do with her own body. It seems to me it doesn't matter though with how you present it.

You used to different terms in describing whatever is going on in the womb.
In the case of of the man you referred to him killing a child in the womb.

In the case of abortion you called it terminating a pregnancy.

You don't understand the inconsistency of saying it is not ok for a man to kill that child and then in the same breath saying its ok to kill as long as its the mom. If it was a child when the man shot, it was a child when the mom hired a doctor to kill it. That is the inconsistency. As a supporter of abortion you should have no remorse for a child dying in the womb under any circumstances.

Its the same as saying that its not ok for a man to shoot a toddler but its ok if a mom chooses to drown it.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

There is a resource. The penal code of each and every state is posted online or available at your local library. If you are concerned about legal liability, you can easily access it. That, or ask an attorney.

As I said, in plain English. Not legalese. People shouldn't have to get a lawyer just to know the laws in their area.

I've read the law. And I've also read countless interpretations and confused people on the internet debating that one line of law means two or three different things.

The state/county/town should have shit listed and then explain in plain English what this means you can or can't do.

 

[NfoRcEr]

Well if the prosecutor refuses to file a case, the estate of the baby could bring a wrongful death action against the man.

100% serious question from someone who didn't go to law school. If a fetus was never born and thus never a baby, how does it have an estate?

 

[TheChocolateWar]

As I said, in plain English. Not legalese. People shouldn't have to get a lawyer just to know the laws in their area.

Legalese is not that hard to read. I don't understand what is difficult about...from Virginia's code, "Any person who lawfully occupies a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when the other person has unlawfully entered the dwelling, having committed an overt act toward the occupant or another person in the dwelling, and the occupant reasonably believes he or another person in the dwelling is in imminent danger of bodily injury."

Virginia is one of the most archaic in its legalese too. How is this hard? (Note: Am I jaded after law school? I find this super easy to read)

100% serious question from someone who didn't go to law school. If a fetus was never born and thus never a baby, how does it have an estate?

An estate is a legal creation. In the case of a wrongful death action, the "estate" is basically the next of kin or a guardian ad litem who sues on behalf of the child as "next best friend". A guardian ad litem is a court appointed counsel that represents the interests of the child before the court. Next best friend is a dumb colloquial we use in the legal profession that does not mean the lawyer is your friend.

 

[quickwhips]

I would normally agree. The problem is that they were already out of the house and fleeing. So, yeah, the guy obviously knew at that point that they weren't going to kill him. Whether they were going to back or not is irrelevant; that's for the police to deal with.

The only reason they were out of his house was because he came back with a gun. Fuck them both.

 

[OriginalNameGuy]

One could also argue that you could be considered morally reprehensible. Was he killed? Was he raped? Did someone pull a weapon on him? No. Someone knocked him down in a scuffle in his home and fled. He callously chased one of them down and shot them in the back after they pled for their life. If you think that's ok, then you have a pretty messed up sense of right and wrong.

Was he killed? Really? If you're dead it's too late to defend yourself. I don't want to live in the world where I have to be on death's door or someone has a knife at my throat before I can retaliate. The thieves escalate the situation when they decide to break in. Their action warrants a response from the homeowner. Don't want to get shot? Don't break in.