""He confronted them with a shotgun," Corbett said, and asked them to stop."
It sounded more like: "Hey stop!" "oh ######/what?" *Bang* *Bang* rather then giving them a few seconds to realize the situation and stop, unless they charged him for a unknown reason.
<!--quoteo(post=1660991:date=Nov 18 2007, 08:32 AM:name=cshank4)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cshank4 @ Nov 18 2007, 08:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1660991"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The use of a shotgun in this crime CLEARLY indicates that this man is a serial killer, trained by the game DOOM.
Thus, I propose that we BAN all old people from playing DOOM, this will help in our efforts to stave off Elderly-on-Everyone Crime.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo..........!!! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry:" border="0" alt="mad-fix.gif" />
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->BOOM YOU'RE DEAD<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->What kind of news reporting site is this?
<!--quoteo(post=1661008:date=Nov 18 2007, 11:48 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Nov 18 2007, 11:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661008"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They're quoting the guy. Man, what an idiot.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I picture the guy as the engineer from TF2, taunting. "Yippikeeyaikeeyohkeyaikiyay"
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1660991:date=Nov 18 2007, 08:32 AM:name=cshank4)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cshank4 @ Nov 18 2007, 08:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1660991"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The use of a shotgun in this crime CLEARLY indicates that this man is a serial killer, trained by the game DOOM.
Thus, I propose that we BAN all old people from playing DOOM, this will help in our efforts to stave off Elderly-on-Everyone Crime. <!--quoteo(post=1660992:date=Nov 18 2007, 08:37 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Nov 18 2007, 08:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1660992"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo..........!!! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry:" border="0" alt="mad-fix.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the above article is pretty comprehensive (better than Ogrish aka Liveleak)
lulz, castle doctrine. old dude is gonna get off clean.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> maybe maybe not.
IT sounds like the law states you can defend your OWN crap, not your neighbors.
Tbh, the law sounds bloody stupid. The idea that you can use deadly force just to stop some prick from taking your ######ing TV?
We no longer live in a frontier, this is not a situation where there is no law, so why should citizens be allowed to use deadly force to protect stuff (I have NO problem with the use of deadly force for defending your self or another citizen, but for property?)
I don't see where you can tell the old guy's getting off clean. The article is at the very least ambiguous.
Edit: Thansal beat me. In any case, I think the law says stuff like "burglarly" so if you shoot someone who you thought was going to hurt you, but in reality was just taking your stuff, you can't be prosecuted.
Well, if you go in knowing that if you steal something that you can get killed doing it, and do it anyways, dont you deserve to get shot? Common sense plz?
My things are worth more than a common thief's life, and a got a mossberg 500 cruiser to prove it.
Hell, you could get killed pinching a pack of gum from a drugstore if the owner is in a homicidal mood that day. That doesn't mean that you deserve it, or that he is absolved of all blame if he decides to blow your ######ing head off. There's a reason why theft does not carry the death penalty, and that reason isn't "because the laws have yet to catch up to public sentiment."
<!--quoteo(post=1661033:date=Nov 19 2007, 06:02 AM:name=Drfuzzy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Drfuzzy @ Nov 19 2007, 06:02 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661033"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My things are worth more than a common thief's life, and a got a mossberg 500 cruiser to prove it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sigh.
Sanctity of life? Whazzat?
Your religious nutjobs go around preaching that all life is sacred and you can't <i>possibly</i> end the "life" of a blob of a dozen or so cells that might someday become a human, even if it would save the life of hundreds of babies, children and adults. On the flipside, none of you seem to have any problems in gunning down an adult who might be stealing your precious widescreen TV or hummer. Justice is for law enforcement to mete, not a senile idiot with a shotgun.
A thief, in all likelyhood, is someone that wouldn't be doing what they're doing if there was an alternative. There's plenty of room for compassion.
<!--quoteo(post=1661033:date=Nov 18 2007, 02:02 PM:name=Drfuzzy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Drfuzzy @ Nov 18 2007, 02:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661033"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My things are worth more than a common thief's life, and a got a mossberg 500 cruiser to prove it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't even want to think about the kind of sick, twisted morality that would justify killing someone over, like, a thousand bucks worth of stuff.
<!--quoteo(post=1661037:date=Nov 18 2007, 09:35 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Nov 18 2007, 09:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661037"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't even want to think about the kind of sick, twisted morality that would justify killing someone over, like, a thousand bucks worth of stuff.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Eye for an eye. Tooth for a tooth. Gory shotgun death for touching my stuff.
<!--quoteo(post=1661040:date=Nov 18 2007, 02:37 PM:name=Dirty_Harry_Potter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dirty_Harry_Potter @ Nov 18 2007, 02:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661040"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Eye for an eye. Tooth for a tooth. Gory shotgun death for touching my stuff.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For touching my neighbor's stuff. The neighbor who I don't even know. Oh, and you broke their window too. Now DIE.
<!--quoteo(post=1661045:date=Nov 18 2007, 10:04 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Nov 18 2007, 10:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661045"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For touching my neighbor's stuff. The neighbor who I don't even know. Oh, and you broke their window too. Now DIE.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Oh right, thank you, I'll amend the constitution right away!
Zig...I am Captain Planet!Join Date: 2002-10-23Member: 1576Members
edited November 2007
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Your religious nutjobs<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> nice try... atheists like myself tend not to give two and three quarter sh*s about petty thieves either. especially when we know morality and such has no bearing on your fortune or the "place you go after death". which is... into the dirt.
Zig...I am Captain Planet!Join Date: 2002-10-23Member: 1576Members
<!--quoteo(post=1661026:date=Nov 18 2007, 11:47 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Nov 18 2007, 11:47 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661026"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't see where you can tell the old guy's getting off clean. The article is at the very least ambiguous.
Edit: Thansal beat me. In any case, I think the law says stuff like "burglarly" so if you shoot someone who you thought was going to hurt you, but in reality was just taking your stuff, you can't be prosecuted.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't make that judgment based on the article, I shoulda been more specific..
But yeah, if the old dude's story checks out and they were in his yard, threatening him on his own property, I think he'll get off clean.
Would it happen in any other state? Oh helllllls no :U But I don't think this old guy is going to jail.
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
I'm torn on this. I can't completely disagree with the Old Man, but being killed for stealing ###### seems a bit much. If it was my own home, I probably would've shot them- not anywhere to kill them though. I'm the kind of person that doesn't like the idea of taking someone's life for this kind of thing, but harming their quality of life isn't so bad.
And as to "If they had any other alternatives they wouldn't be doing it" is pretty BS. There are always alternatives, and justifying stealing someone's stuff with that kind of logic just seems real asinine to me, especially considering that even if the two were caught, they wouldn't be in jail for even a year.
And as to lolfighter's capitalistic society comment: Comon now, what kind of bull###### is that? We know you like Americans about as far as you can throw them, but are you really so ignorant as to think we don't believe in sanctity of life? ######, if we were to go by your kind of "The worst of your people is obviously your average" way of looking at things, I'm sure I could bring up a whole list of things you'd call foul on. Seriously now, opinion over what to do is one thing, but saying that anti-capitalist BS is just ignorant.
<!--quoteo(post=1661084:date=Nov 18 2007, 08:14 PM:name=Quaunaut)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Quaunaut @ Nov 18 2007, 08:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661084"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm torn on this. I can't completely disagree with the Old Man, but being killed for stealing ###### seems a bit much. If it was my own home, I probably would've shot them- not anywhere to kill them though. I'm the kind of person that doesn't like the idea of taking someone's life for this kind of thing, but harming their quality of life isn't so bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shooting to wound could be argued in court that you weren't afraid for your life, which means you had no reason to harm the intruder. Simply: If you shoot to wound then you could be sued (successfully) by the thief.
<!--quoteo(post=1661087:date=Nov 18 2007, 07:23 PM:name=Xyth)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Xyth @ Nov 18 2007, 07:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661087"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Shooting to wound could be argued in court that you weren't afraid for your life, which means you had no reason to harm the intruder. Simply: If you shoot to wound then you could be sued (successfully) by the thief.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Heh, that loophole is probably there on purpose so that it will encourage people to kill instead of injure.
Here's some food for thought though - if the thieves were quite underaged yet still posed a certain threat somehow (c'mon - even babies carry guns in the U.S these days)? What then?
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
The guy was safe in his house. He was repeatedly told not to go out, that there were cops on the way, and he shouldn't shoot them.
Then he went out and shot them. Bravo. That's real good thinking, right there. Even on the incredibly small chance that one of them had a gun/knife and they ran towards him and/or aimed at him, he shouldn't have been out there in the first place.
Seriously, if he'd picked up a camera instead of a gun, he could've got a picture of them through the window safely, and it would've taken what, all of 6 hours for the cops to hunt them down?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->On the tape of the 911 call, the shotgun can be heard being cocked and Horn can be heard going outside and confronting someone.
"Boom! You're dead!" he shouts. A loud bang is heard, then a shotgun being cocked and fired again, and then again.
Then Horn is back on the phone:
"Get the law over here quick. I've now, get, one of them's in the front yard over there, he's down, he almost run down the street. I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man, I had no choice! ... Get somebody over here quick, man."
Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, are you out there right now?"
Horn: "No, I am inside the house, I went back in the house. Man, they come right in my yard, I didn't know what the --- they was gonna do, I shot 'em, OK?"
Dispatcher: "Did you shoot somebody?
Horn: "Yes, I did, the cops are here right now."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It sounds like the cops were what, about 30-60 seconds away? Chances are they would've driven right past them.
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
If they're in my house, I'd say its automatic fear-for-life. Once again, not the situation. This guy was clearly in the wrong.
And either way: Yeah I'd go to jail. ######, one of my family's friends went to jail because he shot and killed a man who shot at him in a bar- killing him in the first shot. Then he emptied the rest of it into the guy. He went to jail for shooting the corpse. 8 years.
<!--quoteo(post=1661098:date=Nov 18 2007, 09:20 PM:name=Quaunaut)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Quaunaut @ Nov 18 2007, 09:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1661098"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If they're in my house, I'd say its automatic fear-for-life. Once again, not the situation. This guy was clearly in the wrong.
And either way: Yeah I'd go to jail. ######, one of my family's friends went to jail because he shot and killed a man who shot at him in a bar- killing him in the first shot. <b>Then he emptied the rest of it into the guy.</b> He went to jail for shooting the corpse. 8 years.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, had he not done that he probably would have gotten off just fine. It's when you go from self-defense to malicious attack is when the law gets you.
For example: You are being mugged by 2 thugs, one of which has a gun. You realize it is very likely they will kill you whether you give them money of not, so you manage to wrestle the gun away from the guy and in the conflict he gets shot and dies. Seeing the change of situation the other thug then tries to flee the scene, you are now in control of the situation. However in a fit of blood-rage and fear you shoot down the fleeing survivor. Up until that point the law was on your side, however since the fleeing thug wasn't an immediate danger and you still killed him it turns into an attack. Likewise, if you shot him in the leg (maybe you didn't want a chance of him getting away) you would still be in trouble since he didn't pose a threat. Even more interesting still, had you got the gun away from the first thug then shot him in the leg, you could be held accountable. The law almost pushes you towards shooting-to-kill.
Comments
It sounded more like: "Hey stop!" "oh ######/what?" *Bang* *Bang* rather then giving them a few seconds to realize the situation and stop, unless they charged him for a unknown reason.
Thus, I propose that we BAN all old people from playing DOOM, this will help in our efforts to stave off Elderly-on-Everyone Crime.
Thus, I propose that we BAN all old people from playing DOOM, this will help in our efforts to stave off Elderly-on-Everyone Crime.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo..........!!! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry:" border="0" alt="mad-fix.gif" />
They're quoting the guy. Man, what an idiot.
I picture the guy as the engineer from TF2, taunting. "Yippikeeyaikeeyohkeyaikiyay"
except people actually died IRL.
Thus, I propose that we BAN all old people from playing DOOM, this will help in our efforts to stave off Elderly-on-Everyone Crime.
<!--quoteo(post=1660992:date=Nov 18 2007, 08:37 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Nov 18 2007, 08:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1660992"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo..........!!! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/mad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":angry:" border="0" alt="mad-fix.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will second that cshank!
the above article is pretty comprehensive (better than Ogrish aka Liveleak)
lulz, castle doctrine. old dude is gonna get off clean.
the above article is pretty comprehensive (better than Ogrish aka Liveleak)
lulz, castle doctrine. old dude is gonna get off clean.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
maybe maybe not.
IT sounds like the law states you can defend your OWN crap, not your neighbors.
Tbh, the law sounds bloody stupid. The idea that you can use deadly force just to stop some prick from taking your ######ing TV?
We no longer live in a frontier, this is not a situation where there is no law, so why should citizens be allowed to use deadly force to protect stuff (I have NO problem with the use of deadly force for defending your self or another citizen, but for property?)
Edit: Thansal beat me. In any case, I think the law says stuff like "burglarly" so if you shoot someone who you thought was going to hurt you, but in reality was just taking your stuff, you can't be prosecuted.
My things are worth more than a common thief's life, and a got a mossberg 500 cruiser to prove it.
Sigh.
Sanctity of life? Whazzat?
Your religious nutjobs go around preaching that all life is sacred and you can't <i>possibly</i> end the "life" of a blob of a dozen or so cells that might someday become a human, even if it would save the life of hundreds of babies, children and adults. On the flipside, none of you seem to have any problems in gunning down an adult who might be stealing your precious widescreen TV or hummer. Justice is for law enforcement to mete, not a senile idiot with a shotgun.
A thief, in all likelyhood, is someone that wouldn't be doing what they're doing if there was an alternative. There's plenty of room for compassion.
--Scythe--
I don't even want to think about the kind of sick, twisted morality that would justify killing someone over, like, a thousand bucks worth of stuff.
For touching my neighbor's stuff. The neighbor who I don't even know. Oh, and you broke their window too. Now DIE.
nice try... atheists like myself tend not to give two and three quarter sh*s about petty thieves either. especially when we know morality and such has no bearing on your fortune or the "place you go after death". which is... into the dirt.
Shoot a damn thief, what do I care?
Edit: Thansal beat me. In any case, I think the law says stuff like "burglarly" so if you shoot someone who you thought was going to hurt you, but in reality was just taking your stuff, you can't be prosecuted.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't make that judgment based on the article, I shoulda been more specific..
But yeah, if the old dude's story checks out and they were in his yard, threatening him on his own property, I think he'll get off clean.
Would it happen in any other state? Oh helllllls no :U But I don't think this old guy is going to jail.
And as to "If they had any other alternatives they wouldn't be doing it" is pretty BS. There are always alternatives, and justifying stealing someone's stuff with that kind of logic just seems real asinine to me, especially considering that even if the two were caught, they wouldn't be in jail for even a year.
And as to lolfighter's capitalistic society comment: Comon now, what kind of bull###### is that? We know you like Americans about as far as you can throw them, but are you really so ignorant as to think we don't believe in sanctity of life? ######, if we were to go by your kind of "The worst of your people is obviously your average" way of looking at things, I'm sure I could bring up a whole list of things you'd call foul on. Seriously now, opinion over what to do is one thing, but saying that anti-capitalist BS is just ignorant.
Shooting to wound could be argued in court that you weren't afraid for your life, which means you had no reason to harm the intruder. Simply: If you shoot to wound then you could be sued (successfully) by the thief.
Heh, that loophole is probably there on purpose so that it will encourage people to kill instead of injure.
Here's some food for thought though - if the thieves were quite underaged yet still posed a certain threat somehow (c'mon - even babies carry guns in the U.S these days)? What then?
Then he went out and shot them. Bravo. That's real good thinking, right there. Even on the incredibly small chance that one of them had a gun/knife and they ran towards him and/or aimed at him, he shouldn't have been out there in the first place.
Seriously, if he'd picked up a camera instead of a gun, he could've got a picture of them through the window safely, and it would've taken what, all of 6 hours for the cops to hunt them down?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->On the tape of the 911 call, the shotgun can be heard being cocked and Horn can be heard going outside and confronting someone.
"Boom! You're dead!" he shouts. A loud bang is heard, then a shotgun being cocked and fired again, and then again.
Then Horn is back on the phone:
"Get the law over here quick. I've now, get, one of them's in the front yard over there, he's down, he almost run down the street. I had no choice. They came in the front yard with me, man, I had no choice! ... Get somebody over here quick, man."
Dispatcher: "Mister Horn, are you out there right now?"
Horn: "No, I am inside the house, I went back in the house. Man, they come right in my yard, I didn't know what the --- they was gonna do, I shot 'em, OK?"
Dispatcher: "Did you shoot somebody?
Horn: "Yes, I did, the cops are here right now."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It sounds like the cops were what, about 30-60 seconds away? Chances are they would've driven right past them.
And either way: Yeah I'd go to jail. ######, one of my family's friends went to jail because he shot and killed a man who shot at him in a bar- killing him in the first shot. Then he emptied the rest of it into the guy. He went to jail for shooting the corpse. 8 years.
And either way: Yeah I'd go to jail. ######, one of my family's friends went to jail because he shot and killed a man who shot at him in a bar- killing him in the first shot. <b>Then he emptied the rest of it into the guy.</b> He went to jail for shooting the corpse. 8 years.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, had he not done that he probably would have gotten off just fine. It's when you go from self-defense to malicious attack is when the law gets you.
For example:
You are being mugged by 2 thugs, one of which has a gun. You realize it is very likely they will kill you whether you give them money of not, so you manage to wrestle the gun away from the guy and in the conflict he gets shot and dies. Seeing the change of situation the other thug then tries to flee the scene, you are now in control of the situation. However in a fit of blood-rage and fear you shoot down the fleeing survivor. Up until that point the law was on your side, however since the fleeing thug wasn't an immediate danger and you still killed him it turns into an attack. Likewise, if you shot him in the leg (maybe you didn't want a chance of him getting away) you would still be in trouble since he didn't pose a threat. Even more interesting still, had you got the gun away from the first thug then shot him in the leg, you could be held accountable. The law almost pushes you towards shooting-to-kill.