Posted on 11/22/2019 9:17:54 PM PST by DoodleBob
It would be in Texas.
Agreed! He is not guilty. The government is once again our enemy, folks. Eventually the criminal class will get so out of control and with no government to step in (except to attack those who defend themselves) we will have to choose to fight back.
JoMa
#25
They were just starting to get their life together. Soon to start Bible Study and aspirations of higher education. /sarc
Inside a building on the private property of a homeowner.
Who believes these kids were there to tidy up the place? They were in the act of committing a felony. Dindunuffin’s did do something. Did they deserve the death penalty for stealing? Obviously not but when they decided they could go on someone’s private property and steal (or worse) then they assumed the risk they might get killed in the process.
If I were on the jury: Not Guilty. If found guilty then other dindu’s will think they can do what they want and assume no risk when committing these breaking and entering crimes. Definitely not guilty. Just because they were shot in the back didn’t mean they didn’t have intent to do bodily harm to the homeowner.
Yeah, entry wounds in the back are problematic.
There are two OBVIOUS variables to consider:
1. Homeowner’s adrenaline. And this situation was caused by the perps in his garage.
2. Can you trust them to not come back and take you out for revenge or similar.
Best to take them out now, to remove worry about them coming back for your stuff and maybe more out of revenge.
In a county with home invasions, living at the end of a narrow half mile driveway with multiple No Trespassing signs, on a farm, with a Ruger MiniRanch, this 67 year old man is going to shoot in front, in back, anywhere i can, because i may have a stroke or heart attack and i may not be able to fight back a second time if they turn around. I have others to protect here. And then , i’ll hire a good attorney.
He likely saved tax payers many millions in the future.
Hey, f*** you too, little dead dude.
You’re right. The man needs Massad Ayoob as an expert defense witness. I read one of Ayoob’s articles about how a criminal can turn while being shot and create a problem for the homeowner.
His discussion of the timing involved was eye-opening.
This case raises a lot of interesting issues that have also been seen in other “self defense gone wrong” cases.
Everybody who has taken any self-defense class knows that you can’t shoot the perps in the back.
Everybody with half a brain knows that “murder” is a deliberate act either planned or reasonably foreseeable as the result of illegal acts by the murderer.
Homeowners who are victimized by violent crime and who, in fear of death are serious harm arm themselves with a firearm, and who then in many cases are confronted by disparity of force (age, sex, multiple perps, etc) really do not have the necessary mental state to commit murder.
Now, if you shoot your daughter’s boyfriend or someone who you argued with earlier in the day, sure, there’s work to be done by the DA.
But shooting strangers who have already made a serious threat by breaking in and awakening you from sleep? I can imagine scenarios where that would be manslaughter (shooting them in the back while fleeing the scene is one). But “murder”?
That’s going too far.
DA’s need murder convictions to advance politically
I see they were members of the Nike gang. A particularly well known bunch with world wide connections.
Parent or grandma.
Oh? I thought at least junior college and a carreer as rappers. Now in a wrappers.
“Dayton police Chief Richard Biehl on multiple occasions has said a new state law shifts the burden of proof in self-defense cases from the defendant to the prosecutors, which could affect this case.
“The burden is on the state to prove this was not self-defense — it’s a high standard,” Biehl said.”
It was a bad shoot, period.
I remember my Brother brandished his Carry Pistol once and the wannabe Perp turned around and ran. If he advanced in a threatening manner, the rules would have changed.
That is the best outcome for the potential Victim and the Perp. Even when the shoot is 100% justified, you end up taking a ride to the Police Station. To think otherwise is to make the false assumption that the Authorities support your Second Amendment Rights. They merely tolerate your Rights at best.
The two kids were stupid Punks, but that doesn’t give anyone the right to shoot them in the back.
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.