Posted on 01/15/2005 6:50:11 AM PST by Mad Dawg
If someone tells a police officer that they saw a rape take place the officer will probably investigate. If a police officer comes to your door you should talk with him. Unless he witnessed a crime taking place the officer probably won't take any invasive measures to make an arrest without a rape victim.
If an armed neighbor comes to your door you may feel justified in leaving by the back door although many here would recommend shooting first. If Hughes had shot his neighbor for threatening him in his own home would that be a "good shooting?"
Nothing in the article indicates that a felony took place other than in the mind of a thirteen year old girl. The shooter in this case never witnessed any crime and according to his statements he had some previous issues with the man he shot. This doesn't make a very good case for the shooting. Perhaps the article left something out. Maybe we'll find out later.
Whether he was wrong or right, he was stupid. I was taught in my CCW class never to use your weapon unless you are prepared to spend the next 10 years in prison to prevent what you are trying to prevent. In other words, if someone is about to seriously hurt or kill your child, I'd be willing to spend 10 years in prison to save their life. I would not be willing to spend 10 years in prison to "detain" this guy the cops could have found anyway. Also, this guy pulled the first gun. Whose to say the dead guy wasn't defending himself. In this state, they would prosecute.
Whether he was wrong or right, he was stupid. I was taught in my CCW class never to use your weapon unless you are prepared to spend the next 10 years in prison to prevent what you are trying to prevent. In other words, if someone is about to seriously hurt or kill your child, I'd be willing to spend 10 years in prison to save their life. I would not be willing to spend 10 years in prison to "detain" this guy the cops could have found anyway. Also, this guy pulled the first gun. Whose to say the dead guy wasn't defending himself. In this state, they would prosecute.
Hey folks, a lot of you are missing the point - he went to the house, not to aprehend the guy, but hung around outside to make sure the guy was there when the police came. The guy started getting nervous - understandable when you see somebody hanging around outside your house - so he tells him just to stay in the house, that the police are coming....what would you do at that point? I know what I would do, I'd nervously await the arrival of the police, and probably call my lawyer - because you know there is an accusation (unfounded if you're innocent) and you want your attorney there ANYTIME you are accused and being questioned.
This guy starts heading for the exit - not the "normal" response, it wasn't until the guy started reaching into his pockets that he drew his gun....and he warned him several times to take his hand out of his pockets. My impression was that he was trying to get the guy to just go back into his house.
This sounds solid all the way around. The more citizens we have that take the "I'll just wait at home until the police come" attitude, the more crime we'll have. The more citizens who decide they aren't going to be passive about the crime around them, the less we'll have.
BTW - some 13 year olds I wouldn't believe if they told me the sun would rise in the east tomorrow....some I would believe if they told me an albino gorilla, smoking a cigar was coming at me with a Tommy gun. It depends on the 13 year old - and he obviously knew his daughter and her honesty quotient better than any of us; and it is pretty presumptuous for anybody to dismiss her testimony based on her age.
I agree.
Isn't the magic word "witnessed"? This is more like "alleged" than "witnessed".
I don't know how to think about the general question and I'd like to see the discussion. But in this case, we have only an allegation and I know that I would go to a magistrate to get a warrant before I went after this guy.
fishing in his pockets? I'm trying to envision a scenario where, I have a weapon on me, and i'm searching for it like i'm trying to locate a tube of chapstick. I doubt it would take me more than two seconds to pull a pistol if that was my intention. I dont buy the shooter's story for a minute.
This was one incident where the shooter was WRONG! He should never have confronted the man since there was no crime IN PROGRESS - he had his identity, and address know - allow the police to do their jobs.
I am wondering a bit now if this person had experience with the police and knew that they would not respond or that they had let this rapist go in the past? There are a few details missing here also to cause the shooter to act this way. (( IF he had a reason, that is ))
If not, he should be charged with murder.
Yeah, the more I read this, the worse it sounds. That could be just lousy reporting, but there is certianly something going on here that was not presented to us. I'll come back if I learn more.
The Supreme Court has disagreed with your presumptions and your conclusions. There are a number of self-defense cases dating from the 1890s. One case, Alberty v. United States, 162 U.S. 499, had some similarities to this case. A man witnessed another man climbing into the window where his wife was staying. There are others: Wallace v. United States, 162 US 466; Allison v. United States 160 US 203; Beard v. United States 158 US 550; among others.
We can't say that the house was where the suspect resided--he was leaving the house--but assuming he had just raped someone, would it be beyond him to trespass on another's property? Assuming he had raped another, would you or any other reasonable person believe him capable of other misdeeds? The Supreme Court cases cited justify his actions.
WHOSE wife, the wife of the witness or the wife of the climber? I bet that makes a difference.
... but assuming he had just raped someone, would it be beyond him to trespass on another's property? Assuming he had raped another,....[Emphasis added]
Isn't the magic word "assuming"? And the magic word above would be "witness". Here there is only an allegation. The man did not witness the attack. I don't know but I think that might be relevant.
If the suspected rapist had made it back into the house...the police may not have been able to get him back out to arrest him, or to question him.
Just because the witness was 13, we're not suppose to believe her? My daughter is 10, and if she told me someone was screaming...hysterically...for help, I would believe her!
You said it better than I did!
"Oh no! He killed Carrot Top."
LOL! Finally! That guy should've been put to sleep years ago. ;)
This story doesn't pass the smell test to me, either. Pretty flimsey as far as "self-defense" goes, IMHO. I think I, too, would've let the cops handle it since I had a desription of the guy and knew where he lived, or at least an address to give them as to where I saw him last.
And on that alone you would go out prepared to shoot someone? The article indicates that you would be wrong since the woman involved says that she was not being raped. Of course if you are determined to shoot someone that shouldn't make any difference.
Do I have this right? The shooter goes onto the property of another man, orders man around his property, draws a gun on him, points it at him, threatens him with gun, before shooting and killing the man on his property because he thought the man had commited rape based on heresay eveidence?
Shooter belongs in jail if you ask me.
I would like to [Paul Harvey voice] hear the rest of the story.
5.56mm
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.