No disagreements there, but I think it'll be hard jailing her corpse without leaving a pretty bad smell.
Man shoots and kills intruder. Police determine she was not pregnant.
- Thread starter MThanded
- Start date
- Status
cpp_is_king
Member
Why? Some of us would be happy to see mandatory death sentences for people who are the perpetrators of violent crimes such as this. Are you going to sit here and argue that the entire country of Singapore, where they have mandatory death sentences for simple drug offences, is full of nothing but sociopaths? Well, whatever. Call it what you will, but they have some of the lowest crime rates in the world. Wonder why that is.
Say a woman gets raped and fires shots at perpetrators with the intent to kill and succeeds. Feelings and emotional states are completely irrelevant, right? All I'm saying is that I think it's pretty extreme to judge him without any regard for the circumstances. And based on what we know at this point I don't blame him at all for his actions even if they weren't the best ones.
Also, let's stop it with the bit about him shooting the woman while she was on the ground unless we get a citation. I'm not seeing this in any of the articles and someone is speaking out of their ass.
If you ever end up in a legal-action situation, make absolutely sure you get a lawyer and don't try to defend yourself, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
But it's not just about possession, it's about not being able to leave your house, everytime someone konck at your door stress come back. I'm not saying killing is ok, but after being rob three time in a year you are never the same, i can't imagine when they hurt you too.
Oh yay. Death penalty defenders.
Okay. Let's take that out of the equation until it's confirmed.
He still shot and killed a women fleeing and begging for her life.
Also an in the moment defence is not the same as aiming to kill someone fleeing.
NOT robbing people is somehow not simple?
I read about the first 15 pages of this thread, so I'm fully aware of the circumstances.
It might be because Singapore has one of the highest average incomes in the world.
Also, fuck that, the death sentence is barbaric and should not be applied even in cases of murder.
First, stop using analogies. Talk about the case as is.
Second, yes, feelings are irrelevant here. We should not live in a society of cold-blooded revenge killing. The entire idea of having a legal system in the first place is that individual citizens are not able to function as judge, jury, and execution.
No you're right, I edited my post.
This particular case isn't simple was what I was getting at, but you didn't specify this case.
cpp_is_king
Member
I think it should be used more frequently.
And is this what you're assuming is going on here? It's entirely possible he was emotionally distressed and acted out in a way he normally would not have. Some of you are condemning him without any regard for what kind of emotional state he might have been in. That's my issue right now. If it's later found that out he was playing a game of yolo human hunting like some other old white dudes in the media that's a different story but right now we don't have all the details.
FrostuTheNinja
Member
Damn, they'd still be alive if they didn't rob the guy.
I assume he was angry and scared.
I also think that should have no effect on whether his act is condemnable. You do not shoot a person who is not a clear and present threat to you.
Yeah I'll condemn someone who pursues and kills intruders.
In the moment of being attacked? That's self-defence. But chasing after them and killing someone begging for their life? You have to be pretty damn sociopathic to still kill someone after that.
We'll just have to agree to disagree then.
Yep, if you dehumanize the person doing it and disregard his current mental state.
Saint Gregory
Member
That's not what I'm talking about though, I talking specifically about the many posts that basically are saying once someone takes your property or enters your house their lives are forfeit. If someone's in your house and you have no idea what their intentions are thenI can understand if someone feels that they have no other choice but to defend themselves but once someone has left, whether they have your stuff or not, that's not justification for killing them. At that point it's just revenge, plain and simple.
In a lot of these cases we hear "but they might come back and do it again" but that's not a defense. You can't kill someone because you think there's a possibility they may hurt you in the future. As someone said earlier in the thread that you basically give a defense to every school shooter as most of them were also being beaten up, robbed and bullied in school before retaliating.
TheChocolateWar
Member
Not 100% correct, but generally yes. There is the doctrine of the battered wife syndrome that is making the rounds, and given the facts it could conceivably apply in this situation. Would be interesting to see.
xBladeM6x
Member
_1.jpg)
spectral_method
Banned
If someone is in my property after they have stolen my belongings you can bet your ass I'm gonna shoot them, begging aint gonna change that. Begging might change where I shoot you, but I will feel no remorse for shooting a scumbag.
TheChocolateWar
Member
Have fun spending life in the pen.
Saint Gregory
Member
Battered wife syndrome is a very specific situation where you have systematic abuse combined with dependence and an overwhelming feeling from the spouse that there's no other way to escape the situation than to kill. I don't see how that applies here. It just sounds like the old man was tired of being robbed and bullied by these people.
The robber was not on his property when he shot her.
TheChocolateWar
Member
From what I read these people were systemically badgering the old man and this had happened more than once. Unless I misread the statement of facts earlier. I know its a stretch, but it would be fun to see them try to expand the doctrine.
Muffdraul
Member
It doesn't matter! Won't somebody PLEASE think of the poor scumbag home-invading thieves in the night?! Just let them take your belongings and go! It's not like you really need them, right?
I don't think anyone's asking you to care for the thieves.
They are asking you not to defend murder.
nicoga3000
Saint Nic
I disagree with the way the old guy handled the situation, but my wife and I have talked and I will be buying a gun for self-defense soon. If someone breaks into my house and I feel threatened, my family is 100% more important than the person who is trespassing. If it ever came to it, I would have no remorse.
Muffdraul
Member
I'm defending people who defend themselves against thieves.
"Dehumanize" haha
When someone is fleeing and begging for their life, there's no reason ANYONE should consider killing them. You call the police, not end their life.
The robbers are idiots and should have faced jail time. They should not be executed by a sociopath.
One of the reasons we don't allow for these revenge killings is because these can end up killing innocent people. You don't get to shoot someone just because they're in your house and you think they might be robbing you. If you're being attacked and using it as self-defence, then fine. But pursuing and murdering is not okay when they're fleeing.
You need serious help.
If the thieves are running away you are not justified in using deadly force.
Well if he is telling the truth, they didn't just take his shit and go. They held him hostage while trying to break into his safe. Seems a lot of people are ignoring that.
You have a funny definition of self-defense.
Point out one person.
Really feel for this old man. Being attacked can cause people to react some crazy ways. Glad to see that they caught the other criminal and he's being charged with the murder of the lady.
Sounds like she may have used the 'I'm pregnant' ploy to avoid getting shot. It's one thing to rob someone...it's quite another to rob and attack them.
Sounds like she may have used the 'I'm pregnant' ploy to avoid getting shot. It's one thing to rob someone...it's quite another to rob and attack them.
spectral_method
Banned
Yeah, not gonna happen cause I live in Texas. Shoot people for days down here.
Do you have experience with handling firearms?
Every single person saying "ITS JUST THINGS!"? Its not just things when it turns into a hostage situation.
False. As described in the article his actions are obviously illegal in Texas, too.
It's not a hostage situation when the perpetrator is running away.
Muffdraul
Member
Some judges would disagree with that statement.
Nobody has ignored this. Not once.
What people are saying is that the moment they fled and begged for their life, he should not have revenge killed them.
TheChocolateWar
Member
That ignores the fact that the case could be brought in another state than Texas even if the event occurs in Texas. Not just that, but I doubt that law will stay on the books much longer. I question whether it violates due process.
Muffdraul
Member
I never claimed it was "self-defense". It's defense of one's property and one's domicile.
No, I don't imagine many would. Besides, juries do that job anyway. He clearly broke the law, that's irrefutable.
This.
So I'm assuming all of you would be ok with civilians/police officers gunning down robbery suspects without a moment's hesitation, right? How about if someone keys your car? How about if someone drunkenly punches you in the face? Chase them down and kill them, right? Why the fuck do we even need courts and juries and shit. You can defend the old man for shooting at them while they were in his home, but chasing them down an alley and gunning down the woman while she pleads for her life if something else. Fuck is wrong with you people?
I agree with that, but people saying this is a simple B&E are ignoring the holding him down while the tried to pry into his safe.
- Status