14 yr old shot from 30 ft away;shooter claims Stand Your Ground (1 Viewer)

[StrikeS2k]

Hey guys,

This thread has really slowed down. Tim needs his Trayvon fix but can't post in that thread so can you all pick up the racist angle or something to appease him.

TIA.

Thank you for considering me. Like Mussolini, I need my appeasement from time to time.

Mussolini was also executed.

 

[Clifford]

Just saying hi from my desk at work with my Remora-holstered Glock 26 tucked under my work shirt/slacks.

Big fan of these holsters... infinitely adjustable height/cant and there is 0% chance you know I'm carrying unless you grab my hip.

You posted this to make a point. Is your point "haha, screw all you people afraid of guns, I have one and carry it at work. Nyah nyah?"

If not please let me know what it is.

Pretty much, yeah.

I like Icon, but he did the exact same thing in the gun control thread- kept posting that he was inspired to go buy more guns, shoot more guns, etc. It was pretty pointless, but heck, let him have his fun, I suppose.

Doubt you would be saying that if you worked with him...

 

[timschochet]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

 

[matttyl]

Not IMO

This coming from the guy who (inappropriately) brought the 5th(or 6th, depending on the count) commandment into this argument?

What in the hell are you talking about? The fact that I said Jesus might disagree with the statement that person A killing person B is morally neutral? Shoot the messenger if you want, but he was pretty clear on this issue. Turn the other cheek? Wasn't a commandment, post-dated Moses by quite a bit.

You didn't say "Jesus might disagree" , you said "not according to Jesus Christ."

Killing <> Murder, Murder is wrong, Killing could be justified, especially in the case of self defense.

As I said, though, He did say "thou shall not steal", and "honor thy mother and thy father". If either of those had been done, we wouldn't be here right now.

 

[matttyl]

Could I suggest not going around killing people then?

Could I suggest not going stealing and trespassing then?

 

[[icon]]

Just saying hi from my desk at work with my Remora-holstered Glock 26 tucked under my work shirt/slacks.

Big fan of these holsters... infinitely adjustable height/cant and there is 0% chance you know I'm carrying unless you grab my hip.

Springfield XD9 subcompact here. Well not here. I work in a gun free zone. I have not had problems or discomfort with my De Santos* tuckable IWB holster. It was between my XD and a G26. I liked the XD trigger a little better and felt it fit my grip better.

i hope nobody attacks you at work...that would suck

Or says "boo" You wouldn't be equipped to respond appropriately to the emotion of fear.

The more you post in this thread, the more your wife's actions in this thread make sense.

Wow you really can't discuss this without getting really, really mad can you? So much so you have to bring a completely unrelated thread in which I asked for advice.

dude I am not in any way shape or form upset. You guys cant go ahead and think that's the case but it's simply not. Addressed this yesterday. This thread is entertaining as hell.

I was merely pointing out your posting style here reflects a personality that I can see eliciting the type of issues you're dealing with there. Nothing more, nothing less. Sorry if that offends you. Just made the connection this AM so I thought I'd comment on it.

If you'd like I'll delete the post.

 

[[icon]]

Just saying hi from my desk at work with my Remora-holstered Glock 26 tucked under my work shirt/slacks.

Big fan of these holsters... infinitely adjustable height/cant and there is 0% chance you know I'm carrying unless you grab my hip.

You posted this to make a point. Is your point "haha, screw all you people afraid of guns, I have one and carry it at work. Nyah nyah?"

If not please let me know what it is.

Pretty much, yeah.

I like Icon, but he did the exact same thing in the gun control thread- kept posting that he was inspired to go buy more guns, shoot more guns, etc. It was pretty pointless, but heck, let him have his fun, I suppose.

Yeah I was just trolling you guys with those posts

I own a whopping 3 firearms:

Glock 26 > Carry/Self-Defense and range use

Remington 870 w/ 18 & 28" Barrels > Short barrel in for home defense. Long barrel for sport shooting (target clays).

Colt LE6900 AR15 > Primarily range use (Currently working on my 200yd sport shooting skills)

 

[jsharlan]

I find it hard to fathom that people assume that the homeowner is a liar and a murderer here, when the person shot is described by his own family as a career criminal by age 14 who's committed multiple thefts and burglaries and who left his house to take out the trash, according to his mother, at 10 pm and just never came back in, and was actively committing a crime at the time he was shot. Why is the immediate assumption "well, that homeowner sure made some bad decisions!" When there are perfectly reasonable and rational reasons for him to have done what he did, including his own story of what happened?

I don't the homeowner is a murderer, and I have no reason to think he is a murderer. I think in all likelihood he acted in accordance with LA castle law and this will be ruled justifiable homicide. I don't think it can be ruled self-defense as he wasn't being attacked and really was not defending his person.I think our laws allow and in turn almost advocate a "shoot first" approach to these situations. I think if our laws changed to make it harder to have a situation such as this ruled a justifiable homicide, then maybe this guy Landry would not have shot as quickly as he did.

I think the kid put himself in a situation where he could get shot. I certainly don't think he is without blame.

This thinking gets under my skin. Not only do I have fear if confronted by a would be attacker this line of thought should get me not only to worry about what this guy will or won't do but have in the back of my mind If I kill or harm this person society is going to send me to prison. That is just well ####ed up.

Having to be confronted with the thought that you might go to prison for shooting and possibly killing another human being who is not attacking you is too much for you to think about? Could I suggest not going around killing people then? Maybe waiting until you are actually attacked if you want to use self-defense as your reason?

If you want to wait for someone to shoot you so you can be "attacked", its kinda hard to defend yourself. Nothing legally requires you to be physically attacked before you can defend yourself. I have no sympathy for criminals coming under fire while committing crimes. Occupational hazard. If more criminals feared their potential victims, there would be a whole lot less overall crime.

 

[jsharlan]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

 

[kentric]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

This is amazing. I was going to describe Tim the same way - with those exact words. Its so refreshing to see someone else use words like terdburglar and saknuzzling. You're a literary genious I tell ya.

 

[kentric]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

 

[Todd Andrews]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

This is amazing. I was going to describe Tim the same way - with those exact words. Its so refreshing to see someone else use words like terdburglar and saknuzzling. You're a literary genious I tell ya.

You are too kind. Great minds think alike and Timsquishhole brings out the worst in all of us, etc.

 

[ATC1]

Just saying hi from my desk at work with my Remora-holstered Glock 26 tucked under my work shirt/slacks.

Big fan of these holsters... infinitely adjustable height/cant and there is 0% chance you know I'm carrying unless you grab my hip.

Springfield XD9 subcompact here. Well not here. I work in a gun free zone. I have not had problems or discomfort with my De Santos* tuckable IWB holster. It was between my XD and a G26. I liked the XD trigger a little better and felt it fit my grip better.

i hope nobody attacks you at work...that would suck

why would anyone want to shoot up a school?

 

[kentric]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

This is amazing. I was going to describe Tim the same way - with those exact words. Its so refreshing to see someone else use words like terdburglar and saknuzzling. You're a literary genious I tell ya.

You are too kind. Great minds think alike and Timsquishhole brings out the worst in all of us, etc.

Glad to see humor is alive and well in the FFA.

 

[Politician Spock]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

I think he went a little overboard.

Nimrod actually led people.

 

[jsharlan]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

If the cops investigating the scene found evidence, then I agree. But I don't agree with a blanket arrest in every self defense case.

 

[timschochet]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

This is amazing. I was going to describe Tim the same way - with those exact words. Its so refreshing to see someone else use words like terdburglar and saknuzzling. You're a literary genious I tell ya.

You are too kind. Great minds think alike and Timsquishhole brings out the worst in all of us, etc.

Glad to see humor is alive and well in the FFA.

It certainly is, but I'm not seeing much of it here.

 

[matttyl]

If you want to wait for someone to shoot you so you can be "attacked", its kinda hard to defend yourself. Nothing legally requires you to be physically attacked before you can defend yourself. I have no sympathy for criminals coming under fire while committing crimes. Occupational hazard. If more criminals feared their potential victims, there would be a whole lot less overall crime.

Very, very, very well said. It seems some don't quite follow your basic logic, though.

 

[matttyl]

Maybe I'm just "fishing", if I understand the term properly.....

But it seems the NAACP came down on the judge for letting the HO out on bail after shooting an African-American (14 year old) on his property.

Would they have done the same had the HO been African-American but every single other detail in this case were the same (still an African-American "victim")?

If not, isn't that an obvious double standard when we're dealing with identical victims? Is this anything like the double standard many feel (didn't say I feel, but others certainly do) Riley Cooper is facing right now?

 

[jsharlan]

I dont think it should surprise you that the NAACP stands for double standard.

 

[Clifford]

Not IMO

This coming from the guy who (inappropriately) brought the 5th(or 6th, depending on the count) commandment into this argument?

What in the hell are you talking about? The fact that I said Jesus might disagree with the statement that person A killing person B is morally neutral? Shoot the messenger if you want, but he was pretty clear on this issue. Turn the other cheek? Wasn't a commandment, post-dated Moses by quite a bit.

You didn't say "Jesus might disagree" , you said "not according to Jesus Christ."

Killing <> Murder, Murder is wrong, Killing could be justified, especially in the case of self defense.

As I said, though, He did say "thou shall not steal", and "honor thy mother and thy father". If either of those had been done, we wouldn't be here right now.

So the Commandment reads "Thou shalt not murder"?

You didn't say "Jesus might disagree" , you said "not according to Jesus Christ."

Please explain what you view as the qualitative difference between these two statements

Also, Jesus lived well after the commandments, issued to Moses and Chronicled in the Old Testament. Jesus's disagreement stems not just from God's Commandment, which you adorably think reads "Thou shall not murder," but from his bit about "Turn the other cheek."

Anyway, you've shown enough ignorance on the subject to show Christian doctrine doesn't influence you, so I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I am a gunowner, a warmonger, and a huge fan of killing in general. I just prefer my killing to be of deserving adults of all races. Not black kids.

Two questions:

1. Your carve-out is just for black kids or kids in general?

2. What's your definition of "deserving"?

Here's a third question:

3. Why are you attempting to engage this guy? As usual, he's looking for one-liners that are calculated to piss off the most people. Are you truly expecting some kind of logic here?

1. Kids in general, black kids more specifically

2. "Deserving" can have many definitions for many people depending on the context, my preferred definition is probably legally justifiable

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

This is amazing. I was going to describe Tim the same way - with those exact words. Its so refreshing to see someone else use words like terdburglar and saknuzzling. You're a literary genious I tell ya.

You are too kind. Great minds think alike and Timsquishhole brings out the worst in all of us, etc.

Glad to see humor is alive and well in the FFA.

It certainly is, but I'm not seeing much of it here.

Timsqrothole, you wouldnt know humor if it teabagged you for the entire duration it read you War and Peace, which is pretty much how we all feel when you post here.

 

[Clifford]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

The police believe a crime was committed. They arrested the guy and charged him with a crime because they thought a crime had occurred. Is this not what police are supposed to do?

 

[jsharlan]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

The police believe a crime was committed. They arrested the guy and charged him with a crime because they thought a crime had occurred. Is this not what police are supposed to do?

Did I say otherwise? You are taking my general statement and applying to this specific case. In fact I already stated if the police found evidence then an arrest is warranted.

 

[Emerson Biggens]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

Age of person shot and where he was shot don't imply a crime was committed. Right now, based on what I've read, a trespasser/burgler was caught in the act, told to not move, didn't comply to those instructions by making a move (at that point any move is questionable, but one to a waistband is a threat), and shot because of it. The police may have more evidence than what has been released, resulting in the arrest. But, based on what evidence has been released, the arrest is bull ####.

 

[jon_mx]

I just don't see offing a kid that might be looking at breaking into my car. I don't care if it is 2 am and in my driveway. I bet I have had my car broken into a half-dozen times. I could have shot 6 neighborhood kids.

 

[Rayderr]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

They should really take him to the morgue.

 

[jsharlan]

I just don't see offing a kid that might be looking at breaking into my car. I don't care if it is 2 am and in my driveway. I bet I have had my car broken into a half-dozen times. I could have shot 6 neighborhood kids.

So why is assuming he "just" wants to break into your car correct, but assuming he wants to harm you is not? Was the homeowner supposed to run a background check first to see just how bad of a criminal this was? Everyone who keeps going on about "just" trespassing, or "just" robbing you, has the benefit of hindsight. The homeowner on the spot did not.

 

[[icon]]

I just don't see offing a kid that might be looking at breaking into my car. I don't care if it is 2 am and in my driveway. I bet I have had my car broken into a half-dozen times. I could have shot 6 neighborhood kids.

and still some people think this is about the car/house being broken into...

What if, removing hindsight from the equation, it looked like he was reaching for a gun in his waistband?

 

[Clifford]

I find it hard to fathom that people assume that the homeowner is a liar and a murderer here, when the person shot is described by his own family as a career criminal by age 14 who's committed multiple thefts and burglaries and who left his house to take out the trash, according to his mother, at 10 pm and just never came back in, and was actively committing a crime at the time he was shot. Why is the immediate assumption "well, that homeowner sure made some bad decisions!" When there are perfectly reasonable and rational reasons for him to have done what he did, including his own story of what happened?

I don't the homeowner is a murderer, and I have no reason to think he is a murderer. I think in all likelihood he acted in accordance with LA castle law and this will be ruled justifiable homicide. I don't think it can be ruled self-defense as he wasn't being attacked and really was not defending his person.I think our laws allow and in turn almost advocate a "shoot first" approach to these situations. I think if our laws changed to make it harder to have a situation such as this ruled a justifiable homicide, then maybe this guy Landry would not have shot as quickly as he did.

I think the kid put himself in a situation where he could get shot. I certainly don't think he is without blame.

This thinking gets under my skin. Not only do I have fear if confronted by a would be attacker this line of thought should get me not only to worry about what this guy will or won't do but have in the back of my mind If I kill or harm this person society is going to send me to prison. That is just well ####ed up.

Having to be confronted with the thought that you might go to prison for shooting and possibly killing another human being who is not attacking you is too much for you to think about? Could I suggest not going around killing people then? Maybe waiting until you are actually attacked if you want to use self-defense as your reason?

If you want to wait for someone to shoot you so you can be "attacked", its kinda hard to defend yourself. Nothing legally requires you to be physically attacked before you can defend yourself. I have no sympathy for criminals coming under fire while committing crimes. Occupational hazard. If more criminals feared their potential victims, there would be a whole lot less overall crime.

You don't consider someone raising a gun at you being attacked? Or showing a gun in this situation?

My point remains, if you can't deal with the fact that killing someone, even if you think it's justified, might bring about some negative consequences, then maybe you don't need to go around shooting people. The shooter is almost always exonerated in this country because are laws are worded to give weight to the shooter's fear (IE reasonable belief life might be in danger). That's a huge departure from actually being attacked and your life actually being in danger (as it would be if someone pointed a gun at you). They include the "reasonable belief" to account for the unloaded gun scenario, meaning the mindset of the shooter is actually given preference over the reality of the event. Fine.

But it seems you're saying you find even this too limiting, as certain circumstances (the kid being unarmed in this case) could lead a jury to decide that the HO's belief that his life was in immediate danger, to be unreasonable.

Waiting to see something that confirms suspicion of a threat <> waiting to be fired upon. Not a huge difference, but enough to at least be a little more sure that the homicide you are about to commit is justified.

I mean, what would have happened in this specific case if the HO had waited that extra split second to see if the kid pulled something from his waistband? It would not have endangered the HO's life any further than it was already in danger. There is a strong possibility that he would not have shot the kid, would not be facing murder charges, and the kid would have run off.

I think the true litmus test in this thread is this question: Is the world a better place for this HO having shot the kid, or would it be a better place if he had not shot the kid.

I'm going to say the latter because I think the HO suffers far more, and I don't think death or near-death is a punishment that fits the crime that was likely taking place.

 

[cstu]

What if, removing hindsight from the equation, it looked like he was reaching for a gun in his waistband?

The point is that if you're of the mind to kill someone the legal opportunity is there.

 

[jon_mx]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Perhaps the police have evidence in this case to suggest this guy is lying. Arresting people to avoid public outcry is not a legitimate use of police powers, but it does happen. Zimmerman should have never gone to trial based on the evidence available. Maybe this case is the same way. But right now we really don't know too much.

 

[jon_mx]

I just don't see offing a kid that might be looking at breaking into my car. I don't care if it is 2 am and in my driveway. I bet I have had my car broken into a half-dozen times. I could have shot 6 neighborhood kids.

and still some people think this is about the car/house being broken into...

What if, removing hindsight from the equation, it looked like he was reaching for a gun in his waistband?

I would wait for a football move before I fired.

 

[cstu]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

Age of person shot and where he was shot don't imply a crime was committed. Right now, based on what I've read, a trespasser/burgler was caught in the act, told to not move, didn't comply to those instructions by making a move (at that point any move is questionable, but one to a waistband is a threat), and shot because of it. The police may have more evidence than what has been released, resulting in the arrest. But, based on what evidence has been released, the arrest is bull ####.

You don't see the problem here? As the law is written all you have to do is yell "Freeze!" and if they don't you can claim they reached for a gun and kill them.

 

[Clifford]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

Age of person shot and where he was shot don't imply a crime was committed. Right now, based on what I've read, a trespasser/burgler was caught in the act, told to not move, didn't comply to those instructions by making a move (at that point any move is questionable, but one to a waistband is a threat), and shot because of it. The police may have more evidence than what has been released, resulting in the arrest. But, based on what evidence has been released, the arrest is bull ####.

You don't see the problem here? As the law is written all you have to do is yell "Freeze!" and if they don't you can claim they reached for a gun and kill them.

The problem is after doing that they might actually have to get arrested.

 

[matttyl]

So the Commandment reads "Thou shalt not murder"?

Yes, it does...

Exodus 20 ESV (English Standard Version):

And God spoke all these words, saying,...

13. "You shall not murder"

or

Deut 5. ESV (English Standard Version)

17. "You shall not murder"

 

[jsharlan]

I find it hard to fathom that people assume that the homeowner is a liar and a murderer here, when the person shot is described by his own family as a career criminal by age 14 who's committed multiple thefts and burglaries and who left his house to take out the trash, according to his mother, at 10 pm and just never came back in, and was actively committing a crime at the time he was shot. Why is the immediate assumption "well, that homeowner sure made some bad decisions!" When there are perfectly reasonable and rational reasons for him to have done what he did, including his own story of what happened?

I don't the homeowner is a murderer, and I have no reason to think he is a murderer. I think in all likelihood he acted in accordance with LA castle law and this will be ruled justifiable homicide. I don't think it can be ruled self-defense as he wasn't being attacked and really was not defending his person.I think our laws allow and in turn almost advocate a "shoot first" approach to these situations. I think if our laws changed to make it harder to have a situation such as this ruled a justifiable homicide, then maybe this guy Landry would not have shot as quickly as he did.

I think the kid put himself in a situation where he could get shot. I certainly don't think he is without blame.

This thinking gets under my skin. Not only do I have fear if confronted by a would be attacker this line of thought should get me not only to worry about what this guy will or won't do but have in the back of my mind If I kill or harm this person society is going to send me to prison. That is just well ####ed up.

Having to be confronted with the thought that you might go to prison for shooting and possibly killing another human being who is not attacking you is too much for you to think about? Could I suggest not going around killing people then? Maybe waiting until you are actually attacked if you want to use self-defense as your reason?

If you want to wait for someone to shoot you so you can be "attacked", its kinda hard to defend yourself. Nothing legally requires you to be physically attacked before you can defend yourself. I have no sympathy for criminals coming under fire while committing crimes. Occupational hazard. If more criminals feared their potential victims, there would be a whole lot less overall crime.

You don't consider someone raising a gun at you being attacked? Or showing a gun in this situation?

My point remains, if you can't deal with the fact that killing someone, even if you think it's justified, might bring about some negative consequences, then maybe you don't need to go around shooting people. The shooter is almost always exonerated in this country because are laws are worded to give weight to the shooter's fear (IE reasonable belief life might be in danger). That's a huge departure from actually being attacked and your life actually being in danger (as it would be if someone pointed a gun at you). They include the "reasonable belief" to account for the unloaded gun scenario, meaning the mindset of the shooter is actually given preference over the reality of the event. Fine.

But it seems you're saying you find even this too limiting, as certain circumstances (the kid being unarmed in this case) could lead a jury to decide that the HO's belief that his life was in immediate danger, to be unreasonable.

Waiting to see something that confirms suspicion of a threat <> waiting to be fired upon. Not a huge difference, but enough to at least be a little more sure that the homicide you are about to commit is justified.

I mean, what would have happened in this specific case if the HO had waited that extra split second to see if the kid pulled something from his waistband? It would not have endangered the HO's life any further than it was already in danger. There is a strong possibility that he would not have shot the kid, would not be facing murder charges, and the kid would have run off.

I think the true litmus test in this thread is this question: Is the world a better place for this HO having shot the kid, or would it be a better place if he had not shot the kid.

I'm going to say the latter because I think the HO suffers far more, and I don't think death or near-death is a punishment that fits the crime that was likely taking place.

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

 

[jsharlan]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

Age of person shot and where he was shot don't imply a crime was committed. Right now, based on what I've read, a trespasser/burgler was caught in the act, told to not move, didn't comply to those instructions by making a move (at that point any move is questionable, but one to a waistband is a threat), and shot because of it. The police may have more evidence than what has been released, resulting in the arrest. But, based on what evidence has been released, the arrest is bull ####.

You don't see the problem here? As the law is written all you have to do is yell "Freeze!" and if they don't you can claim they reached for a gun and kill them.

You make alot of assumptions that a law abiding homeowner just WANTS to shoot someone. You do realize your scenario is much less likely than a surprised homeowner generally being scared and acting on instinct to protect his family? You antis call us the paranoid ones, but you act like everyone who owns a gun just wants to go around shooting people. It is a ridiculously baseless assumption.

 

[cstu]

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

If your wife and kids are so important, what are you doing running around in the dark with someone who might try to kill you instead of calling the police? On top of that, how safe is your family if you get arrested and a jury convicts you?

As for the second part, it's the reason I have mixed feelings about this case. Chances are that the world is a better place without him in it. Maybe he could have turned his life around but the odds were against it.

 

[cstu]

Cops are saying it was not justified and are asking for murder 2. So it's going to trial because the police that serve this neighborhood believe HO broke the law. Not because of Sharpton.

Clifford is correct here as far as it goes with outside agitators. So far, this case is largely staying in house.

One of the big things that could have headed off the George Zimmerman circus would have been if he had been arrested right away instead of six weeks later. The NOPD was more savvy in how Landry is being handled (though Landry's $100K bond is a relative pittance)..

I can't agree that someone should be arrested on the spot just to please the public or media. There should be evidence that a crime was potentially committed first.

Well, there is a 14 y.o. kid in the hospital with a bullet hole in his head. Landry is out on bail, but I believe that he should have been arrested (exclusive of the political/public/media agenda).

Age of person shot and where he was shot don't imply a crime was committed. Right now, based on what I've read, a trespasser/burgler was caught in the act, told to not move, didn't comply to those instructions by making a move (at that point any move is questionable, but one to a waistband is a threat), and shot because of it. The police may have more evidence than what has been released, resulting in the arrest. But, based on what evidence has been released, the arrest is bull ####.

You don't see the problem here? As the law is written all you have to do is yell "Freeze!" and if they don't you can claim they reached for a gun and kill them.

You make alot of assumptions that a law abiding homeowner just WANTS to shoot someone. You do realize your scenario is much less likely than a surprised homeowner generally being scared and acting on instinct to protect his family? You antis call us the paranoid ones, but you act like everyone who owns a gun just wants to go around shooting people. It is a ridiculously baseless assumption.

I'm so scared that I'm going to grab my gun, sneak around in the dark and yell "Freeze!" as soon as I see someone. That doesn't seem like the actions of a scared person.

 

[Chaka]

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

If you are going to play the what if game then you can't ignore the possibility that you might end up shooting your teenage son/daughter who is trying to sneak back into the house after a night of partying.

Is the world a better place if you end up murdering your own child?

 

[jamny]

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

Wow, what a KooK

 

[Todd Andrews]

Is the world a better place if Timscrothole keeps posting in this thread?

 

[Todd Andrews]

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

Wow, what a KooK

See, you do get it!

 

[matttyl]

If your wife and kids are so important, what are you doing running around in the dark with someone who might try to kill you instead of calling the police?

I'm not "running around in the dark with someone who might try to kill me", I'm on my own property checking on what got my dog all excited in the middle of the night. Not knowing what I might find, I'm carrying a firearm which is totally within my rights.

 

[Rayderr]

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

If you are going to play the what if game then you can't ignore the possibility that you might end up shooting your teenage son/daughter who is trying to sneak back into the house after a night of partying.

Is the world a better place if you end up murdering your own child?

ooh, ooh, I love "What if" games. Ok, what if the person on the property is actually a soldier from an alien civilization that is on a recognizance mission to determine what's earth defenses are, and by killing him dead, you end up saving the world because the aliens assume we can kick their ### since since their scout hasn't returned and decide not to invade?

 

[jon_mx]

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

Wow, what a KooK

And that was one of his more positive contributions.

 

[Chaka]

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

If you are going to play the what if game then you can't ignore the possibility that you might end up shooting your teenage son/daughter who is trying to sneak back into the house after a night of partying.

Is the world a better place if you end up murdering your own child?

ooh, ooh, I love "What if" games. Ok, what if the person on the property is actually a soldier from an alien civilization that is on a recognizance mission to determine what's earth defenses are, and by killing him dead, you end up saving the world because the aliens assume we can kick their ### since since their scout hasn't returned and decide not to invade?

You can try to joke and distract but you are ignoring that the reality of this situation was based completely on "what if this kid had a gun?". That's why the shooter pulled the trigger and all the arguments supporting that decision are based on that same "what if" scenario.

 

[Rayderr]

You just really have a total disconnect don't you? Your life could be over if you wait a split second. In the dark at 2am, if you wait a split second to see an actual gun in his hand, its too late. You're reaction time is not fast enough. Your wife and kids are sleeping right behind you. You aren't "running around town looking for people to shoot", you are at your house, on gated property, in the middle of the night. As soon as you feel threatened, you fire. Your family deserves your very best. To hell with what posters on the internet think about you after the fact. Your family still being alive is more important. If you go to trial, it was worth it. I have a wife and kids. I will go to prison if it means they live. What I find out later about the guy is irrelevant, at that very moment, that split second of fear and fatherhood, I protect mine. Their life is more important than yours 30 feet from me. You have excepted that fact when you jumped the fence.

Is the world a better place without this child criminal? Yes. You can think me insensitive, but its an absolute reality. You might not deem his crimes worthy of death, but if this kid continued to grow up and progressed to more and more crime? What if when he was 18 he killed someone during a crime? Would their life have been worth his? Its a hypothetical but no less so than the he was "just trespassing" or "just stealing a car".

If you are going to play the what if game then you can't ignore the possibility that you might end up shooting your teenage son/daughter who is trying to sneak back into the house after a night of partying.

Is the world a better place if you end up murdering your own child?

ooh, ooh, I love "What if" games. Ok, what if the person on the property is actually a soldier from an alien civilization that is on a recognizance mission to determine what's earth defenses are, and by killing him dead, you end up saving the world because the aliens assume we can kick their ### since since their scout hasn't returned and decide not to invade?

You can try to joke and distract but you are ignoring that the reality of this situation was based completely on "what if this kid had a gun?". That's why the shooter pulled the trigger and all the arguments supporting that decision are based on that same "what if" scenario.

aye, but that doesn't mean what ifs like "What if you ended up shooting your own kid?" become valid arguments.

 

[Todd Andrews]

3. Timscrotam, you are a vile disgusting squishy yammering meaningless wordpuking nimrod. Just because I see through your bs and I am willing to call you out on it doesnt mean I will tolerate you trying to falsely denigrate me with demeaning accusations when you, Timsquishyscrotus, are the no soul, no rhythm, black barbershop hanging, both sides babbling, Romney/Obama/everyone/no one saknuzzling, inanity regurgitating, please stop posting, Jesus, make him stop posting, terdburglar extraordinaire of the FFA

Wow, what a KooK

And that was one of his more positive contributions.

Thank you for being a voice of reason and wisdom around here.