[Newsbot]

Title: U.S. man charged with killing 2 teens on Thanksgiving admits firing 'more shots than I needed'
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: Alta_redneck
Date: 2012-11-26 22:17:38

[CrazyNewfie]

No wonder I try to avoid the news for the most part. That's fu

[CrazyNewfie]

...cked up!

[CrazyNewfie]

If this guy walks I hope someone puts a bullet between his legs and leaves him like that for a few hours.

[CrazyNewfie]

If he does go to jail I hope he's put in a cell with a large man named Bubba who uses him as his play toy!

[Brenda]

Wow. Just wow. I guess "tress passing" (or breaking and entering) means "death sentence" in this man's mind. US State Department security officer, huh...

[Thanos]

Being a break in tosses this one into a grey area. No break in and they'd be alive right now, unless break ajd enter with an intent to commit robbery or harm a home occupant is now all just youthful hijinks.

[CrazyNewfie]

Thanos Thanos:

Being a break in tosses this one into a grey area. No break in and they'd be alive right now, unless break ajd enter with an intent to commit robbery or harm a home occupant is now all just youthful hijinks.

I agree with your sentiment about the B@E, if the kids hadn't broke in to this guys home they'd be alive today, there's no disputing that fact. It's his actions afterwards that are disturbing, try and picture...a young woman lies on your basement floor, a bullet in her somewhere from the torso down and 2 more in her chest, she's gasping for air and can barely move. Sure this young woman(kid really) just broke in to your home, but how at this point is she a threat?

I fully understand defending yourself in this situation, and if the first shot fired into these 2 kids had been fatal I wouldn't be saying this, I'd be saying he had the right. But that's not the case, his first shots had more than stopped them from doing him any harm, he then goes on to execute them like he's judge, jury and executioner. The girl by the description couldn't even have lifted her hands, so he puts the gun under her chin and fires his "clean kill shot". I don't care what anyone says, that's f..ked up, cold and heartless.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

Being a break in tosses this one into a grey area. No break in and they'd be alive right now, unless break ajd enter with an intent to commit robbery or harm a home occupant is now all just youthful hijinks.

I disagree. The guy was within his rights to fire while he felt threatened but once they were down and no longer a threat he crossed the line by firing again. To his credit he admitted it so maybe he'll plead guilty and face justice like a man.

His behavior wouldn't be outrageous on a battlefield, but this wasn't a battlefield.

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I disagree. The guy was within his rights to fire while he felt threatened but once they were down and no longer a threat he crossed the line by firing again. To his credit he admitted it so maybe he'll plead guilty and face justice like a man.

His behavior wouldn't be outrageous on a battlefield, but this wasn't a battlefield.

Even though I'm skeptical on the use of force to protect one's assets, I do understand the potential fear he may have had, given that he had been burgled before.

As you note, his actions after they were down are nothing short of reprehensible and he's guilty as hell of basically executing these kids. Had they died as a result of their injuries after his first round of bullets, Thanos would be correct in that it'd largely be the fault of the kids committing the crime.

I'm also dubious of him being a man and pleading guilty, but time will tell. either way, he needs to be locked up and never see daylight again - evil like that needs to be caged.

[Thanos]

Minnesota is a castle doctrine state so this case could go either way. The cold bloodedness of the killings might not be enough to defeat a homeowners self defense argument. Personally I'll be surprised if he does any time.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

Minnesota is a castle doctrine state so this case could go either way. The cold bloodedness of the killings might not be enough to defeat a homeowners self defense argument. Personally I'll be surprised if he does any time.

That'll be up to a hearing judge first (to determine if Castle Doctrine applies) and then to a trial court and jury.

I'm thinking he'll likely be charged with 2nd degree murder and if the prosecutor is aggressive he'll get 1st degree because he had to think about it before he delivered the coup de grace to the girl.

[Benn]

As the article says, these laws seem to indicated one can defend their homes using "reasonable force" enough to "eliminate the threat." However this case proves was Conceal and Carry is a bad idea, the average joe public has no idea what is considered reasonable under the law and when the threat is considered eliminated. It does not mean keep it up until you kill them. Laying on the floor in a pool of blood unable to attack is eliminated, even if they are alive, even if they are laughing at you.

Laying in wait for the next person, dragging them to a separate location, positioning them for "finishing shots" shows how one can go from heroic defender to criminal.

[Thanos]

"Reasonable force" seems to be a Canadian issue in self-defense cases. The Americans have a different attitude altogether when it comes to being confronted by violent crime in that they don't seem to see that a victim engaging in self-defense has any obligation at all to hold back in terms of lethality. What this guy did after the robbers were incapacitated was extremely cold-blooded to the point of appearing psychopathic. That he had already become the victim of potential/probable violent criminals before even before he fired the first shot however, in the American context, might be enough to mitigate all of his actions in the eyes of a jury.

I still think he'll walk because, with a good enough defense lawyer that's probably going to have massive amounts of National Rifle Association money behind him, this one looks like it'll have mistrial or hung jury written all over it. To tell the truth, if I was on the jury, I'd be leaning towards not guilty until I was able to judge him by his mannerisms in the court room. In the greater scheme of things even a crazy person has a right to defend himself against attackers and, by initiating the entire scenario through their own illegal actions, it might come down to a simple fact that these two criminal loser Bonnie-and-Clyde wannabes tried to fuck with the wrong guy. And lost.