Paranoia in WV claims 2 victims

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sydde, Jan 27, 2014.

  1. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #1
    Yeah, another gun violence thread

    So, yeah, guns do not kill people on their own, but they SAH make it a lot easier to shoot first and ask no questions.
     
  2. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #2
    Hopefully he will have plenty of time in prison to take lessons in not being a paranoid idiot.
     
  3. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
  4. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #4
    I've only seen this one article on the story, but from reading it it sounds like a murder charge is most likely justified.
     
  5. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #5
    The proliferation of stand your ground laws only encourage tragedies like this. It's time for common sense to take over the hysteria of the NRA and its ilk.
     
  6. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
  7. macquariumguy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    Sarasota FL
    #7
    What has this got to do with stand your ground laws?

    A: Nothing.
     
  8. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #8
    Possibly since people like Zimmerman have gotten off with murder has encouraged other people to try the same thing and claim it was defence when either they were in no danger or were only threatened because they were seeking out danger.
     
  9. colourfastt macrumors 6502a

    colourfastt

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    #9
    This has nothing to do with "stand your ground"; it does relate, however, to the "castle doctrine". Search Google for Joe Horn; he shot and killed burglars in Houston under Texas' "castle doctrine" that not only allows for the shooting of someone breaking into your property, it allows for the same of your NEIGHBOUR'S property. BTW .. the grand jury "no billed" the charges.
     
  10. Menel macrumors 603

    Menel

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    ATL
    #10
    RTFW, or even the summary. It has nothing to do with stand-your-ground. It might vaguely have something to do with Castle Doctrine, *IF* it was actually Black's property. Based on the Sheriff's statement, NOT Mr. Blacks property.

    Even if it was, few laws allow for shooting in the back, which this sounds like. There is plenty of case-law throughout the South, where an intruder has changed his mind, decided to retreat, was still in the persons home but was shot in the back while retreating. Murder charges.

    Many people misunderstand the Zimmerman case. Don't realize Zimmerman was actively being assaulted and having his head smashed into the ground.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-zimmerman-trayvon-martin--marijuana/2501293/

    Mr. Black was suffering no such assault. As such, ignorant people like this Mr. Black, are being correctly charged with murder.
     
  11. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #11
    Yeah, it's more castle doctrine than stand your ground, that doesn't change the fact the whole thing is a pointless tragedy.

    Though I don't think even that applies, since they weren't in his house, and he wasn't in any immediate danger. He could've diffused the situation simply by shouting "hey", or shooting his gun in the air. Chances are good the two guys would've scattered, and never came back. Instead, he decided to kill first and ask questions later.
     
  12. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #12
    That is another act of an irresponsible gun owner. If you are shooting a gun in a conflict with someone you better make sure your life is in danger and that you are shooting to kill. Discharging a weapon as a warning is one of the most idiotic things anyone could possibly do.

    This also has nothing to do with the Castle Doctrine as from the article the people he shot were not on his property. This sounds like cold blooded murder to me.
     
  13. lostngone macrumors demi-god

    lostngone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Location:
    Anchorage
    #13
    How is it irresponsible to fire warning shots out the window?!?

    Isn't this exactly what the Vice President recommends you do?!?

    http://youtu.be/rG_HLlC4oBQ?t=54s

    "if there's ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, walk out and put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house,"
     
  14. Arran macrumors 68040

    Arran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    Atlanta, USA
    #14
    The above uncertainty on whether SYG or the castle doctrine apply is the problem: A confusing array of laws (with too many local variations) suggesting it's legal to kill. Killing has thus been made respectable and normal.

    Net effect: Backwoods Joe glosses over the important legal nuances and takes home the simple message that killing is ok. The law says so. Period.

    I'm not one to quote the bible, but it does set an example in legal clarity that's been lost today. "Thou shalt not kill." Even hillbillies get that.
     
  15. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    It doesn't need to go that far, all it needed was reasonable doubt that such a thing was possible - and in the trial that seems to have been the case.

    Unfortunately how he has reacted afterwards, makes that position a bit absurd IMO.
     
  16. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #16
    Holy ****, I can't believe I just heard that come out of someone's mouth who is involved in policy making around firearms. :eek:
     
  17. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #17

    Some responsible gun owner you are. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Sydde thread starter macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #18
    According to what I read on the Texas case, the shooter first addressed the burglars before killing them. He alleged that they stepped onto his property, where the bodies were found. Which makes that a very different situation, in this case, Mr. Black was basically acting like a sniper, which is really never tolerable.
     
  19. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
  20. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #20
    Citing an idiot like Biden doesn't exactly bolster the idea that you can fire warning shots when someone is on someone else's property. But it seems you think partisan back and forth is an easy way to deflect a substantive discussion. Nice avoidance technique.

    Anyway, what threat does someone opening a shed off the property warrant even firing a gun to scare them off? If they were trying to get in the house I can see it, but did this guy even make an attempt at a simple "HEY WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON (What I may be under the impression is) MY PROPERTY!?". I don't understand the mentality that even the remotest of threats is automatically grounds to grab a firearm.

    It seems like most carrying gun owners I talk to seem to think the world is far more threatening than people who don't carry. I guess when in your mind the only tool you have is a hammer you are predisposed to view things as a nail.

    I'll never understand the love affair with guns.
     
  21. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #21
    The issue with his actions is that they weren't originally on his property (they were breaking into the neighbors home) and he told the 911 dispatch multiple times that he was going to go outside and shoot them. He also mentioned the new Castle Doctrine law that had just gone into effect.
     
  22. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #22

    Nope. A warning shot is not a smart thing at all. It opens you up to charges of reckless endangerment or similar. The shooter doesn't know where the bullet(s) will end up. The fact that you fire a warning shot means you weren't really in imminent danger otherwise you would have shot the person.

    Warning shots are also illegal in most places.
     
  23. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #23
    Yeah, there's nothing irresponsible about firing warning shots at two men who are legally on their own property. But keep trying to sell the ARGO line, it's clearly working :rolleyes:
     
  24. noisycats macrumors 6502a

    noisycats

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Location:
    The 'ham. Alabama.
    #24
    I'm with you on this one, though I generally tend to equate 'love' with a positive situation.

    Perhaps it's more of an obsession?
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan

Share This Page