Paranoia in WV claims 2 victims

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Aug 17, 2009
2,105
2,163
IOKWARDI
Yeah, another gun violence thread

[URL=http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/UPDATE-Two-Men-Shot-to-Death-by-Homeowner-in-Barboursville-241973841.html]WSAZ News[/URL] said:
Rodney Bruce Black, 62, of Barboursville, has been charged with two counts of 1st degree murder.

According to the criminal complaint, Black told detectives in his statement that he saw two men “shaking the door on his tool shed in his backyard.” He said he then “reached and got his .243 and loaded the gun and pointed the gun out of his window and the shot the first male and then pulled the bolt action back and fired another shot and hit the other male.”

Black also told deputies in his statement that the “did not warn them nor did he call 911 when saw them.” He also advised that “no first aid was given after the incident.”

Sheriff McComas said in a release on Sunday that Garrick Hopkins had recently purchased the lot adjacent to #12 Lane Drive. McComas says he took his brother, Carl, to the property Saturday to show him where he and his family were planning to build their new home in the coming weeks.

The Sheriff says the outbuilding in question was on the Hopkins property and contained no belonging of Mr. Black’s.
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.
 

Ugg

macrumors 68000
Apr 7, 2003
1,985
15
Penryn
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.
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
What has this got to do with stand your ground laws?

A: Nothing.
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.
 

colourfastt

macrumors 6502a
Apr 7, 2009
885
524
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.
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.
 

Menel

macrumors 603
Aug 4, 2011
6,199
1,048
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.
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.

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

Evidence supports George Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired the shot that claimed Trayvon's life, a forensic pathologist testified Tuesday at Zimmerman's murder trial.

"The medical evidence is consistent with Mr. Zimmerman's statement," said Vincent Di Maio, an expert witness for the defense. The pathologist also found that Trayvon lived no more than three minutes after the shooting and probably was conscious for at least 10 to15 seconds.

Di Maio also testified that Zimmerman's head injuries could have been caused by coming into contact with concrete and that such injuries can be very dangerous. That testimony supported Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon was slamming his head into a sidewalk.

Di Maio said Zimmerman had at least six injuries from the struggle: two head lacerations, two wounds to his temples and wounds on his nose and forehead. Those injuries were consistent with having his head banged into a sidewalk, Di Maio said.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/09/george-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.
 

Renzatic

Suspended
What has this got to do with stand your ground laws?

A: Nothing.
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.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
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.
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.
 

lostngone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2003
1,340
2,833
Anchorage
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.
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,"
 

Arran

macrumors 601
Mar 7, 2008
4,353
2,725
Atlanta, USA
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.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,372
UK
Many people misunderstand the Zimmerman case. Don't realize Zimmerman was actively being assaulted and having his head smashed into the ground.
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.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
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,"
Holy ****, I can't believe I just heard that come out of someone's mouth who is involved in policy making around firearms. :eek:
 

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Aug 17, 2009
2,105
2,163
IOKWARDI
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.
 

NT1440

macrumors G5
May 18, 2008
12,141
13,987
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,"
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.
 

Moyank24

macrumors 601
Aug 31, 2009
4,334
2,421
in a New York State of mind
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.
Joe Horn, 61, spotted two burglars breaking into his next-door neighbor's home in Pasadena, Texas. He called 911 to summon police to the scene. While on the phone with emergency dispatch, Horn stated that he had the right to use deadly force to defend property, referring to a law (Texas Penal Code §§ 9.41, 9.42, and 9.43) which justified the use of deadly force to protect Horn's home. Horn exited his home with his shotgun, while the 911 operator tried to dissuade him from that action. On the 911 tape, he is heard confronting the suspects, saying, "Move, and you're dead",[3] immediately followed by the sound of a shotgun blast, followed by two more.[4] Following the shootings Mr. Horn told the 911 operator, "They came in the front yard with me, man, I had no choice!" [5]
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.
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
Actually in some circumstances warning shots seem to be reasonable - http://env.gov.nu.ca/sites/default/files/04_warning_shots.pdf.

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.
 

yg17

macrumors G5
Aug 1, 2004
14,888
2,480
St. Louis, MO
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,"
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: