good guy with a gun Protects his house from his wife oops.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Oct 13, 2015.

  1. steve knight Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    with all the guns are great it is time to get real again and post the true reality of guns.
    http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/tex...ly-guessing-she-was-an-intruder/?defensiveuse

     
  2. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #2
    Lovely. Just point and shoot before knowing what you're shooting at.
     
  3. happycadaver macrumors regular

    happycadaver

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Location:
    Germany
  4. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #4
  5. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #5
    Yep, user error for sure. It's a good idea to have a light on the end of a weapon too. I do sense however this story could take a turn though.
     
  6. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #6
    divorce by shotgun.......
     
  7. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #7
    Agree. To hit center mass of a target without enough light to identify said target could be luck but sense otherwise. Also, there's hardly a time my wife is out while I'm home alone and didn't "expect" she would be back before morning. So for this guy to play completely dumb is going to be a stretch.
     
  8. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #8
    It's his right. All he has to do is even think that something could possibly be a threat and that's all that's needed. He doesn't have to actually be threatened. He will likely get off with no charges whatsoever and go on with his life.
     
  9. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #9
    neighbor lady might be involved :eek:
    if the wife not next to him he shoots w/o asking who the hell it was at the front? fry the guy.
     
  10. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #10
    No it isn't his right. Castle doctrine doesn't protect an individual who willfully or recklessly kills their spouse. You are required to identify the threat before you discharge your weapon.

    Just reminding you to study up on the law.
     
  11. steve knight thread starter Suspended

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #11
  12. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #12
    not arguing your logic but it needs said again, cars are a privilege guns are a right. I'll see your point too and say that this country should also look at how to address reckless individuals bearing children too. oh wait...maybe that's going to far.

    in the end though, working through DUI laws would save more lives.
     
  13. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #13
    And South African then I guess.
     
  14. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #14
    Damn. I guess what I thought was plainly obvious sarcasm didn't bleed through. Maybe jkcerda can send me some of his emoticons so I can better define it. I know damn well that this isn't right.

    Shooting someone simply because you think they might possibly could be a threat is pure idiocy. I remember there being a thread a while back about some guy hearing someone rummaging around in his garage, going out into his driveway, and firing blindly into the garage killing the guy. I argued that this was a terrible use of force, and likely not at all legal, but was overridden by one of the pro-gunners saying that this is absolutely what should be expected. I'll have to see if I can dig that up.

    EDIT: Here it is
     
  15. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #15
    just checking...

    it was likely the story of the neighborhood kids stealing beer from a guys garage refrigerator. I don't recall all the details but there was some gray area around whether it was a set up and staged event thus attaching premeditation to the case. IIRC he was found guilty. Again, if it's the same case, the shooter bragged to someone and his wife accidentally provided wording that supported the though he was going to set up the kids so he could kill them. Completely different circumstance than Castle Law.
     
  16. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #16
    That is the story, and I added a link to the thread in my post above. Setup or not, he was inside and came outside to fire into his garage without even assessing what was going on. Someone stealing beer from your fridge in your garage is in no way whatsoever grounds for lethal force. If the kid had tried to get into the house, yes. Stealing stuff from an open garage? Thief, but not violent assailant.
     
  17. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #17
    meh...all depends on the law and how it reads in that state. I don't have the details nor wish to reopen the thread. However, in many cases your garage does fall into the area of an occupied home. violent assailant or not, dead men don't testify thus why when you do fire, you don't wound. Let the courts decide.

    in the end, this guy should have just confronted the suspects long before it escalated. he was likely too passive to do so. in the end it was a good call to put him away.
     
  18. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #18
    That says it all.
     
  19. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #19
    Actually, "all depends on the law and how it reads in that state" says it all
     
  20. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #20
    Saves the maintenance payments.
     
  21. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #21
    Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it is right. Going out to shoot a teenager who is stealing beer from your fridge is not right. If you think it is, simply because it's legal somewhere, then we have a whole different set of issues to discuss.
     
  22. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #22
    Unfortunately there are lots of examples of similar things happening before. Prior history says they always get off.

    Dad shot his daughter dead who had sneaked out of the house to party and was sneaking back in.
    Driver broke down and knocked on door to get help and was shot dead.
     
  23. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #23
    I'm not here to debate what I personally believe is right. If I am within my rights and the laws to kill someone and I do, I really don't care to discuss your opinion of that matter. That's not a check box the police or the judge will care if I don't mark. You're welcome to discuss it though.
     
  24. samiwas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #24
    Rather one-dimensional thinking. Not at all surprising. In fact, pretty much expected.
     
  25. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #25
    really it just boils down to a wasted time argument over nothing except moral values. you don't believe in killing a thief caught red-handed even if you have the law on your side and were 100% able with no real concerns. that's cool.
     

Share This Page