Posted on 07/24/2014 10:08:32 AM PDT by marktwain
(LONG BEACH, CA.) -- They came to the wrong house to do a B & E (break and enter) that night and they most certainly frightened and roughed up the wrong 80-year old man.
For one of the invader-robbers that night, a woman, it was indeed a fatal error in the victim selection process.
Tom Greer, an 80-year-old retiree arrived at his home in Long Beach Tuesday night to find a man and a woman in the middle of a late night break in, ransacking the place.
Greer told L.A.'s KNBC-TV as soon as he got inside both robbers tackled him, "Both of them jumped up on top of me," after they threw him to the ground he said.
The next day he had to be treated at a hospital for a severe shoulder and collarbone injury.
But during the attack on Greer the robbers didn't know that somehow he had gotten a hold of his .22 caliber revolver.
A .22 is a terribly puny, underpowered cartridge for self-defense, most firearms instructors would say, but in a pinch it's better than throwing a rock.
Greer told the station, "I come back and they see me with a gun, and they run," he said.
The man got away, but as they were both running in an alley behind the house. Greer fired his weapon at them and the woman fell after being hit by a bullet.
Greer said the woman pleaded, 'Don't shoot me, I'm pregnant! I'm going to have a baby!' And I shot her anyway," he said.
Greer said after he fired the shots, "She was dead. I shot her twice, she best be dead ... (The man) had run off and left her."
(Excerpt) Read more at skyvalleychronicle.com ...
“Moral law takes into account causality.”
And if it comes to a jury trial then not some brain dead OJ jury. But I think it will be settled without a trial. You can’t put an 80 year old guy up on trial for shooting in response to his bodily injuries, He had an equalizer that evened his odds against these callous young punks
I read she was in the alley but not sure if she went there after she was shot the first time - but he’s saying she was down and pleading - which is really a dumb thing to say. It’s only his state3ment and it’ll convict him ...
Comeon now, a thieving POS thug would never lie about that.
How many of you who are saluting his actions, finishing off a pregnant (so far as he knew) woman, consider yourself pro-life?
His Owners will deftly milk that out of him. They won't be pleased that he killed a future cog for The Great Big Giant Crimnel Jesters Machine.
If a judge Owner or prosecutor Owner had done exactly the same thing, a "Teddy Kennedy fog" would have descended until things could be cleared up in favor of the guilty Owner.
The problem is that most of the peasants STILL don't understand that Law Is For The Little People.
You'd think the George Zimmerman case would have been a giant cluebat.
His sorry life?
Put yourself in his situation jackass.
What you said.
I have read accounts of perps running away, only to find cover and shoot back. Anyone giving home invaders the benefit of the doubt needs their head removed from their nether regions.
BS.
They would both be alive if they had not taken the CHOICE to break into his house.
Actions have consequences.
Yeah, because there is no such thing as a recidivist criminal/s
Get your head out of your backside.
Pregnant women shouldn’t be robbing houses and beating up 80 yo men. How cam you defend that?
Agreed. I believe everyone is entitled to whatever means of self-defense is at hand. This incident has absolutely nothing to do with self-defense, or protecting one’s property.
Asset forfeiture. It's about Jesters, not Justice.
If a criminal takes a human shield you can't just blow them both away, especially if the human shield is an innocent baby.
He had a responsibility to HIMSELF. Get a frigging clue. He was an 80 yo man who was just beaten up by the two vermin.
Being elderly, beaten up, whatever, does not give you the right to kill a baby, particularly when by his own testimony it doesn't sound like finishing the perp off was strictly necessary to keep his own life.
“Assuming she was indeed pregnant (as far he he knew, she was)”
He had no such knowledge. Why should he believe a theif and assailant? Criminals lie all the time. Anyone who has dealt with them knows that. They will say whatever they think will be to their advantage at the moment.
The autopsy will show if she was pregnant or not. Either way, once that became a factor he should have stayed his hand.
I would have shot her if I thought she was a threat to my life or bodily integrity. From his words that we have seen, it does not appear that she was.
I would not give a person immunity because they say they are pregnant. They could simply stop, get down on the floor, and give up. I expect criminals to lie.
Actions are what speak in these situations.
In PA you have the same rules as Mass—so I know you went over this in your training.
I don’t disagree with the sentiment. But legally, you know better.
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.