Hey I'm Bored, anybody want to go .....

[War Eagle!!!]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b00_1377453339

What the fuck?

Why was that girl on her little toy in the street alone? Where were the adults?

That shit infuriates me. 1. Because there was a 3 year old getting picked on. 2. Where were the people that were fucking responsible for her?

[AUTailgatingRules]

From the reporter covering the story...


Dude walked out on his porch in broad daylight, saw a black fellow and just started shooting. 

That's what people take away from this.

Is this a crime?

[Godfather]

This thread is so disturbing, yet I openly chortled several times.

[Townhallsavoy]

From the reporter covering the story...

She called it a "crime" 

Mentioned "unarmed teen" multiple times. 

Dude walked out on his porch in broad daylight, saw a black fellow and just started shooting. 

That's what people take away from this.

The reporter:



First, I would hit it.  Second, this story is a bit more complicated than the Trayvon Martin case, but I still say the guy had every right to shoot the kid dead. 

What a fucked up world.  I love how the photo and still video image on the article are nothing but white people. 

Some say he was just protecting his wife and toddler,  others say the crime was racially motivated.

How can anyone say this was racially motivated?  They really think this owner of this house sought out to find a black person to hop his fence at 2am just so he can shoot him dead? 

[AUChizad]

The reporter:



First, I would hit it.  Second, this story is a bit more complicated than the Trayvon Martin case, but I still say the guy had every right to shoot the kid dead. 

What a fucked up world.  I love how the photo and still video image on the article are nothing but white people. 

How can anyone say this was racially motivated?  They really think this owner of this house sought out to find a black person to hop his fence at 2am just so he can shoot him dead?

how is it more complicated in your estimation?

To me it is even more straightforwardly ridiculous.

I posted in another thread. There's video that showed him and another teen casing the house all day. The other kid was waiting across the street when it happened. The deceased's own brother called him a criminal, as a defense by adding "but he's not a killer". Let alone, duh fucking shit if a kid hops your fence at 2am he's looking to rob the place, and it's more than reasonable to assume he's armed. People climbing your fence at 2 in the morning is what having guns are for.

[Townhallsavoy]

A lawyer friend told me that if I hear a noise at 2am and open my backdoor to see a man standing there, I cannot just shoot him dead no matter what he looks like or the circumstances.  I can hold my gun up.  I can say freeze.  I can even force him to the ground and call the police, but there's still the chance that the guy was coming to my backdoor to see if we found his dog or if we could loan him a cup of sugar. 

Just walk outside and shoot?  That could land me jail time.

That's the difference.  Yes, it's obvious to those with common sense that this kid was going to rob this house and put the family in danger, but what evidence is there to prove that the kid was a fatal threat to the man wielding the gun?  Trayon was pounding Zimmerman's head into the ground.  Of course Zimmerman was going to protect himself.

Was this man protecting himself?  I say so.  So do you.  Is there enough there for the courts to say he was protecting himself?  Not as easy to do as the Trayvon scenario. 

[AUJarhead]

A lawyer friend told me that if I hear a noise at 2am and open my backdoor to see a man standing there, I cannot just shoot him dead no matter what he looks like or the circumstances.  I can hold my gun up.  I can say freeze.  I can even force him to the ground and call the police, but there's still the chance that the guy was coming to my backdoor to see if we found his dog or if we could loan him a cup of sugar. 

Just walk outside and shoot?  That could land me jail time.

That's the difference.  Yes, it's obvious to those with common sense that this kid was going to rob this house and put the family in danger, but what evidence is there to prove that the kid was a fatal threat to the man wielding the gun?  Trayon was pounding Zimmerman's head into the ground.  Of course Zimmerman was going to protect himself.

Was this man protecting himself?  I say so.  So do you.  Is there enough there for the courts to say he was protecting himself?  Not as easy to do as the Trayvon scenario.

Also my understanding that the kid "made a threatening move" like he was reaching for something in his belt.

[Saniflush]

A lawyer friend told me that if I hear a noise at 2am and open my backdoor to see a man standing there, I cannot just shoot him dead no matter what he looks like or the circumstances.  I can hold my gun up.  I can say freeze.  I can even force him to the ground and call the police, but there's still the chance that the guy was coming to my backdoor to see if we found his dog or if we could loan him a cup of sugar. 

Well you go ahead and do that.  I will be awaiting my trial.

[Buzz Killington]

Joe Biden suggests that you just shoot two rounds into the air with your shotgun to deter him.

[AUChizad]

Bottom line, if you think that this guy protecting his family and his property from an obvious burglar at 2am with a gun makes him a monster, it's obvious that the racism card serves no other purpose than emotional appeal. You cannot possibly believe that he wanted to kill a black person because of racial hate. You cannot possibly believe that if the intruder was white, Hispanic, Asian, or other, he would not be dead as well. You are exposed as inserting race artificially into a situation where it is clearly irrelevant, as a trump card conduit for your real agenda. Which is a belief that any guns being used in any situation at any time for any reason should be outlawed. It's pretty obvious, and this case in particular, to me points that out.

With Trayvon, the court evidence proved that he had attacked Zimmerman and he acted in self defense. But the court of public opinion isn't so sure his life was in danger. In fact, most of the public don't even realize there was a scuffle. In either case, Zimmerman was "asking for it" by following him to begin with. While I disagree with this notion, at least that is somewhat of a reasonable notion. In no way, shape, or form was this guy doing anything wrong by protecting his house, himself, and his family. I'm not a lawyer, but I had always thought that if someone had broken and entered your property, it was game on to kill the motherfuckers under reasonable suspicion that your life is in danger, let alone your valuable property. No one's borrowing sugar at 2am on a week night through your back door in your gated back yard. No one.

Also, as for the "threatening move" the kid made, while I'm 100% on the defense's side in this, I think it's pretty obvious his lawyer advised him to say that. His word against a dead person's. Because apparently had it not been for the "threatening move", the breaking and entering with an attempt to rob him blind and possibly hurt him and his family wasn't enough to warrant shooting.

[War Eagle!!!]

A lawyer friend told me that if I hear a noise at 2am and open my backdoor to see a man standing there, I cannot just shoot him dead no matter what he looks like or the circumstances.  I can hold my gun up.  I can say freeze.  I can even force him to the ground and call the police, but there's still the chance that the guy was coming to my backdoor to see if we found his dog or if we could loan him a cup of sugar. 

Just walk outside and shoot?  That could land me jail time.

That's the difference.  Yes, it's obvious to those with common sense that this kid was going to rob this house and put the family in danger, but what evidence is there to prove that the kid was a fatal threat to the man wielding the gun?  Trayon was pounding Zimmerman's head into the ground.  Of course Zimmerman was going to protect himself.

Was this man protecting himself?  I say so.  So do you.  Is there enough there for the courts to say he was protecting himself?  Not as easy to do as the Trayvon scenario.

What happens if the guy makes a move at you or if he reaches in his pocket. If it's me, dude it shot. You can tell him to freeze all you want.

I guess it is different if the homeowner shoots the perp as he is trying to run away, and shoots the kid in the back. I don't think that happens here...

[Token]

A lawyer friend told me that if I hear a noise at 2am and open my backdoor to see a man standing there, I cannot just shoot him dead no matter what he looks like or the circumstances.

No matter the circumstances, your lawyer friend told you that you can't shoot someone on your property at 2am? 

What if he's pointing a gun at you?  What if he has a pry bar in his hand and swings it at you?  What if he has a knife in his hand and stabs you?  There are a lot of circumstances that allow you to shoot him in the face. 

Your lawyer friend should probably stay out of criminal law.

[Townhallsavoy]

No matter the circumstances, your lawyer friend told you that you can't shoot someone on your property at 2am? 

What if he's pointing a gun at you?  What if he has a pry bar in his hand and swings it at you?  What if he has a knife in his hand and stabs you?  There are a lot of circumstances that allow you to shoot him in the face. 

Your lawyer friend should probably stay out of criminal law.

Sorry I was unclear.  I meant that you can't just walk outside and shoot him.  There has to be an actual threat.  My mistake.

[Tiger Wench]

FIrst off, who opens their door to a person unknown to you at 2:00am?  Not this girl.

You stand to the side, gun in one hand and phone in the other.

Turn the porch light on. 

You tell them to back away from the door and off the porch.  You tell said person that you can hear them just fine through the door and to state their purpose.  You can even advise them that you are armed and that if they are not there for a legitimate purpose, you will defend yourself.

If they are truly in need of help, then respond accordingly without opening the door. 

Ask them to provide a number and you will be happy to call their wife/friend to come pick them up if their car is out of gas. 

Tell them that if they need medical attention, 9-1-1 has already been called.

Tell them that you don't lend cups of sugar at 2:00 in the fucking morning. 

If they continue to attempt entry into your home, shoot the motherfucker through the door.

[Townhallsavoy]

FIrst off, who opens their door to a person unknown to you at 2:00am?  Not this girl.

You stand to the side, gun in one hand and phone in the other.

Turn the porch light on. 

You tell them to back away from the door and off the porch.  You tell said person that you can hear them just fine through the door and to state their purpose.  You can even advise them that you are armed and that if they are not there for a legitimate purpose, you will defend yourself.

If they are truly in need of help, then respond accordingly without opening the door. 

Ask them to provide a number and you will be happy to call their wife/friend to come pick them up if their car is out of gas. 

Tell them that if they need medical attention, 9-1-1 has already been called.

Tell them that you don't lend cups of sugar at 2:00 in the fucking morning. 

If they continue to attempt entry into your home, shoot the motherfucker through the door.

Which is my point.  I'm not saying the guy did something wrong by shooting the kid.  I'm just saying it's not as clear cut as the Trayvon case. 

The court could rule that the owner of the home did not need to use fatal force.  The only evidence here that it was needed was his claim that the kid looked like he was reaching for a gun.

[Saniflush]

Oh and while I'm at it, the lock on the door is there to protect them......Not me.

[Token]

FIrst off, who opens their door to a person unknown to you at 2:00am?  Not this girl.

You stand to the side, gun in one hand and phone in the other.

Turn the porch light on. 

You tell them to back away from the door and off the porch.  You tell said person that you can hear them just fine through the door and to state their purpose.  You can even advise them that you are armed and that if they are not there for a legitimate purpose, you will defend yourself.

If they are truly in need of help, then respond accordingly without opening the door. 

Ask them to provide a number and you will be happy to call their wife/friend to come pick them up if their car is out of gas. 

Tell them that if they need medical attention, 9-1-1 has already been called.

Tell them that you don't lend cups of sugar at 2:00 in the fucking morning. 

If they continue to attempt entry into your home, shoot the motherfucker through the door.

All smart things to do. Things I would recommend to do. BUT.......  It's my property. I have absolutely EVERY reason in the world to be there, whereas you do not. If I hear something on the edge of my property ANYTIME of the night, I'm going to confront the problem with a gun. If I find you on my property, Im only going to ask you once why you are there, if your answer is to quickly make a movement towards me, or quickly reach into your pocket, it will likely be your last. Because I'm scared for the safety of myself and my family.

I know the argument here is, if I'm fearful, I shouldn't go outside. But that is an invalid argument. The law doesn't require me to hide in my own house and hope the would be thief only takes my belongings and doesn't try to break into my house. The law doesn't require me to depend on whatever deputy (who might be 25 minutes away) to check on my property and keep me safe. The law doesn't require me to cower with my children in the safest room in my house until I have no other option than defend with deadly force.  The law is, thats my fucking property that I pay for and it is my responsibility 1st to ensure that it is safe for my family, not the government agency that is closest to my residence.

I don't see the problem here. Actually, if more thieves were shot and killed in the commission of their crime, I think that could only be a good thing.