Man kills three suspected burglars with AR-15 rifle

Hoof Hearted

Hoof Hearted

House Member
Jul 23, 2016
4,477
1,173
113
Played hockey and after had beers with a Cop...

Some old guy hit a burglar over the head with a bat as the perp was trying to break in to his apartment. My buddy/Cop shows up and the perp is unconscious in the window well which is outside of the apartment.

So my Cop buddy dragged the knocked out perp into the residence...he didn't want the old guy to get charged unnecessarily.

lol! :)

Gotta love it when the Cops manipulate a scene to protect an innocent old man!
 
J

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
Murphy said:
What if they had their hands up and had surrendered, but he shot them anyway? The entry wounds would have been in their chests!

Hmmm, you're right! Guilty!
Click to expand...

But you can't prove it because the bullet entry point would have not been in the back, carte de blanche...


This following example, im using as an example that basically yea you could murder someone basically because they are on your property, even if they surrender because the point of entry was not in the back. Because they have for example something as small as a swiss army knife in their pockets..

Its like my buddy who killed someone intentionally, that after he invited the guy over to his house he basically threw him down the stairs and choked the guy to death. The guy brags about it that he intentionally murdered someone and only got manslaughter and 5 years because he said he was defending himself. (Im not making this up, ive mentioned this story many times before)

We need to find some written interlocks and controls to include in the written law. I dont have any ideas personally but it is possible.
 
Murphy

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
I am quite sure that there are some instances where you could end someone's life, and it would appear to be justified. But...in the case in question, they were inside someone else's house. According to the news article, weapons were found on their persons. It was in the middle of the night. The homeowner's son was in bed.

There are no controls to be introduced into law for situations like this. They are already there. Three people did something stupid which cost them their lives. It is no one else's fault but their own.

More will be published about this in time. You'll just have to wait.
---

What I will say is, for the past thirty to forty years, people have looked for any reason(s) to excuse their behaviour. For example, these three young adults weren't to blame because of Twinkies, too much television or an abusive family. They should not have died, so let's sue the junk food companies, a broadcaster or the parents.

Somewhere along the line, humans have stopped taking responsibility for their actions, preferring to find a scapegoat or a reason to absolve them of any blame. The courts have been partially at fault for this, allowing some of the arguments to stand. The fast food (Twinkie) defense or abusive parents, etc.

In this particular case, responsibility for their stupidity should not be offloaded to someone or something else.
 
Last edited:
Murphy

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
Johnnny said:
Yes there should be more controls and interlocks. I know a person walking the streets a free man right now after a manslaughter charge who should have been charged with murder and still be in jail.
Click to expand...

I don't know the circumstances, but I would ask how the Crown handled the case.

There are people walking around free that have committed crimes, but for whatever reason, a conviction could not be obtained. I tend to side with the court. To suggest otherwise means they are either incompetent or acting unlawfully.
 
J

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
Murphy said:
I don't know the circumstances, but I would ask how the Crown handled the case.

There are people walking around free that have committed crimes, but for whatever reason, a conviction could not be obtained. I tend to side with the court. To suggest otherwise means they are either incompetent or acting unlawfully.
Click to expand...

I could invite someone over to my house for a poker game with the crew, murder the guy, get the whole crew to provide conflicting versions of the event and ill just get manslaughter, which means ill get away with murder.
 
Murphy

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
petros said:
This still has legs?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately. You know humans. Theories or a lack of information can keep them talking for days.

Johnnny said:
I could invite someone over to my house for a poker game with the crew, murder the guy, get the whole crew to provide conflicting versions of the event and ill just get manslaughter, which means ill get away with murder.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but you don't seem to have any faith in trained investigators, forensics technicians or lawyers.
 
Last edited:
bobnoorduyn

bobnoorduyn

Council Member
Nov 26, 2008
2,262
28
48
Mountain Veiw County
Colpy said:
Quite simply put, self defense is NOT "taking the law into their own hands". It is your right, the most basic of all rights.
Click to expand...


Technically it is taking the law into your own hands, but first you have to agree that the law belongs to all of us and is not solely the purview of the authorities as they would have us believe, (they are dead wrong). Arresting someone in the commission of an indictable offense happens often enough even if the words "citizen's arrest" are not uttered, it is implied, and is not only legal but often appreciated by attending law enforcement, provided it is done within the law.


Justice, however, is solely the purview of the state, and exercising "street justice" has caused a world of hurt, even for police. This is the category into which vigilantism falls.


Our overlords are quite happy that we often confuse these issues and consider them one in the same, which is not correct. Authority figures other than police will often say we can't take the law into our own hands probably in the mistaken belief that they own the law. Police often advise against it knowing that it is within our rights, but more out of concern for personal safety

Johnnny said:
I could invite someone over to my house for a poker game with the crew, murder the guy, get the whole crew to provide conflicting versions of the event and ill just get manslaughter, which means ill get away with murder.
Click to expand...


Or just run them over with your truck, probably wouldn't even get jail time, unless of course you were drunk. Or the Canadian favourite, "it was a huntin' accident". You're over thinking this.
 
J

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
Or just run them over with your truck, probably wouldn't even get jail time, unless of course you were drunk. Or the Canadian favourite, "it was a huntin' accident". You're over thinking this.
Click to expand...

Im not posting the article of the trial here for the public to see because i don't need anyone here knowing the names of my friends or former friends who then can be researched to get a picture of my social network. Thats overthinking.

I could send you the article for you to see that im not making up the poker scenario, but then would you do me the solid and keep the names in the article between you and i? I don't trust anyone here enough to make that move.
 
bobnoorduyn

bobnoorduyn

Council Member
Nov 26, 2008
2,262
28
48
Mountain Veiw County
Johnnny said:
Im not posting the article of the trial here for the public to see because i don't need anyone here knowing the names of my friends or former friends who then can be researched to get a picture of my social network. Thats overthinking.

I could send you the article for you to see that im not making up the poker scenario, but then would you do me the solid and keep the names in the article between you and i? I don't trust anyone here enough to make that move.
Click to expand...


Quite alright, it just seems people do think up inventive means to off somebody and make it look accidental, and interesting cases abound where there are more rather simple methods. Just the same, securing a murder conviction in this country can be a tough row to hoe what with proving beyond reasonable doubt intent, premeditation and the like. A default conviction of manslaughter is often the result, but is still a serious one.
 
R

Remington1

Council Member
Jan 30, 2016
1,469
1
36
If I invite you in my home, that is okay, but if you come in uninvited, and plan to hurt my family or steal stuff i've worked for, then who gives a sh#t if I face you with a AR-15 rifle or a Sig P320? Would they care in the end?
 
bobnoorduyn

bobnoorduyn

Council Member
Nov 26, 2008
2,262
28
48
Mountain Veiw County
Remington1 said:
If I invite you in my home, that is okay, but if you come in uninvited, and plan to hurt my family or steal stuff i've worked for, then who gives a sh#t if I face you with a AR-15 rifle or a Sig P320? Would they care in the end?
Click to expand...


I prefer a pistol, rife bullets, even a .223, have a nasty habit if continuing on even after they hit their intended target and may end up in the neighbour's house, that's more what I care about.
 
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,947
14,436
113
Low Earth Orbit
Rodriguez, who seems to be as intelligent as your average storm drain, confessed to the burglaries in a television interview last week, which should all but assure her conviction for the burglary charges, and since the murder charges are hinged upon the felony murder rule, a conviction on all three murder counts as well.
Click to expand...
hehehe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom