if a girl is getting raped, and she knocks the rapist out, ties him up, bends him over, and rapes him, would you think she should imprisoned as a rapist?
If she was convicted by a jury of her peers or plead guilty to rape. She most certainly shouldn't be given a carte blanche just because she was just raped. Your turn.
well, i personally would have no problem if she raped, stabbed, shot, etc. the rapist, and, yes, i personally think she should be given carte blanche to do whatever the **** she wanted to do with him. i guess we will have to agree to disagree.
If somebody breaks into your house, you have the right to assume they aren't ere for peaceful reasons. The use of force is justified. If you decide to break not somebody's home, you run the risk of being splattered against the wall. Now...if the intruder is already incapacitated and alive and you walk to their fallen body and fire one into their head...the exigency is no longer there and it becomes something else.
Refman is on the money. Most gun buyers don't keep only 1 gun in the house. Usually, there is more than one member of the family with a gun, too. His wife, brother, sister, etc would be packing, too. If another intruder is thinking of jumping in bed with ref's wife or daughter, his lovetool will be shot off by a woman.
Your belief is simple, just don't ever do wrong by anyone. It must be comforting to view the world in such black and white terms. You seem to believe that by committing a crime, you have opened yourself to any form of retaliation; calculated mutilation, execution after you have been neutralized as a threat, rape, etc all are justified and should not result in criminal prosecution against the victim turned perpetrator. So, screw the rules we just want vengeance. Someone steals your wallet, you beat them unconscious, tie them down and then execute them. Someone shoots your dog, you run toward their house, shoot them, disable them, and rape them before executing them. Your employer doesn't pay you and commits wage theft, you tie them up at work, throw them in the broom closet and take a hacksaw to them. Someone breaks into your house and you disable them tie them up and then execute them. Just because someone has (per your judgment) committed a crime against you, you believe that that gives you the right to do anything you want to them for any period of time. I don't. Sure you can shoot someone when you are afraid for your life - that's fine. But when you shoot and disable them, then drag them down the stairs after they are no threat to you, and then execute them, you should be charged for murder and you should be put away. The threat they posed was gone and the threat to society is you.
That couldn't be further from the truth and far more aptly describes your views (every "crime" is equally punishable regardless of circumstance) than mine. I'm in the grey area where if somebody breaks into your house and threatens your privacy and security, you can feel free to have at em.
This is your problem and why you wont let anyone reason with you. You start off by going "he shouldn't go to jail!" then when someone points out how he clearly and pretty obviously broke the law you change to "I don't morally believe he did anything wrong!", not the same thing bud.
either i don't understand what you're saying, or you don't understand what you're saying. people pointed out that he technically broke the law at the start of the thread. that's what my entire argument was in response to. that it's ridiculous that your house can be broken into and your safety threatened, and that you can wind up imprisoned for your ensuing actions against those criminals. my stance has never changed. and, whether he did anything morally wrong is subjective. like i said, i personally would not have finished them off in the manner that he did, but i am objective to realize the possibility that others may not have the same mercy as i do on criminals who have compromised their safety, and, in general, i don't think it's fair to imprison them for their ensuing actions. in a perfect world, this guy is slapped on the wrist, and every would-be burglar reads this cautionary tale, is scared stiff, and thinks twice before breaking into somebody's home.
Good points. As a neighbor in the same burglar striken neighborhood, I could see it as him 'getting his hands dirty' while performing a service that I might not have committed. I might not agree with how he did it, but he did it.... But as a human being, I want his ass in jail if only for a little while, just so that he wouldn't get away with blatant acts of murder. I think he's justifiable in killing those who break in, but I'm not a sociopath interested in making symbols or examples out of anyone, so the whole dragging them into the basement for nice and clean kill shots doesn't seem right to me. Asking for a lawyer the next day also means he knew to some reasonable degree the wrong he committed. The whole way he described it in the statement gives the impression that he's some warrior who defended his home and everyone's home...plus interest. No dude, you killed some drug addicts twice over even when you didn't have to. Maybe bragging more about it will give you the justice you so deserve.
A "finishing shot" through a teenage girl's head after she was incapacitated and no more a threat, dragging and laying bodies together and not calling the cops for a day is all very grotesque, he should be punished. I'm a gun owner who would protect my house with deadly force too, I just don't get off on torturing/murdering dumbass teenage kids. Just shot intruders and call the police immediately if you have too, don't use the opportunity for some whacked "Dexter" like vigilante torture/murder fantasies.
Agreed. Life isn't Mortal Kombat You don't get to incapacitate someone and then FINISH HIM!! Rocket River
I generally don't like our castle doctrines, self-defense laws, or for that matter our Constitutional guarantee of a right to bear arms. In this case, with a guy who has had break-ins in the past so he knows what's going on, he's in a defensible position in the basement and has got the drop on whoever comes down, there's no one else in the house who might be in danger -- I think he has a moral obligation to not fire at all until he has actual cause to think he was in particular danger, like seeing a gun in the person's hand. These sorts of 'don't commit crimes' or 'you don't know what sort of threat they might be' excuses don't do anything for me when you talk about killing people. Yes, it's a bit more dangerous for you to give this unassessed threat a chance to show his hand, but I think you have the moral obligation to take the risk for the sake of that person's life.
He obviously took it too far. He probably didnt even have to fire one shot to resolve the whole thing. It def sounds like he has killed before. People should be arrested and even beaten or shot for breaking in but not executed like that. These kids had no chance. Dumb move breaking in but I still cant help but feel sick to my stomach thinking about how this guy handled it. This guy took pleasure in this. He didnt ask for it but he seemed to enjoy it. That is far from normal.
forget everything we know or think we know about this particular case. that sentence of yours is downright insane.
