Another SC Home Defense Shooting - Page 6
Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 208

Thread: Another SC Home Defense Shooting

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northeastern United States.
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    A 19 year old was "rummaging" around a pickup truck in someone's yard in the middle of the night with the apparent iintention to find some treasure, if not the truck itself. The older gentleman in the home heard noises, grabbed his gun and before calling 911, went outside to confront the 19 year old. He ordered him to turn around and face him and told him to take his hands out of his pockets as he stood there. The 19 year old hesitated and then took one hand out and started to take the other hand out, at which point the old man fired and hit the 19 year old twice--serious injuries but not life threatening; the old man THEN called 911. The solicitor refused to indict and no further legal action has or was taken concerning the old man's actions. In my heart I immensely enjoy everything the old man did. In my mind, however, I find this case a bit troubling. I understand "castle doctrine" etc, but no 911, the seemingly cavalier attitude of priority of property over life, and a confrontation first by the old man who truly initiated his apparent "imminent dange". Any comments?


    In my neihborhood, just turning on all the outside lights would have been enough to end the incident. No 911. no confrontation. no gun fire. no problem. I do agree that lost property is a lose for the property owner.Protection of "LIFE & Property" is the only reason necessary to be licensed to carry where I live. whoever, having said that, I do not own anything in the way of property that is worth taking a life for. A threat to life is a different story. An invasion of my property with hostal intent is a different story. If you don't leave anything of value in your truck, you won't have to shoot someone for looking. If you leave it unlocked they won't have to break in to see that there is nothing there. Insurance covers everything else. Just my oppioion. Every situation determines the responce.

  2.   
  3. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Bangba View Post
    In my neihborhood, just turning on all the outside lights would have been enough to end the incident. No 911. no confrontation. no gun fire. no problem. I do agree that lost property is a lose for the property owner.Protection of "LIFE & Property" is the only reason necessary to be licensed to carry where I live. whoever, having said that, I do not own anything in the way of property that is worth taking a life for. A threat to life is a different story. An invasion of my property with hostal intent is a different story. If you don't leave anything of value in your truck, you won't have to shoot someone for looking. If you leave it unlocked they won't have to break in to see that there is nothing there. Insurance covers everything else. Just my oppioion. Every situation determines the responce.
    " I do not own anything in the way of property that is worth taking a life for"

    First of all, I personally agree overall, but specifically it depends on the crime. We have gotten WAY too lax on crime in this nation. How was that man that shot the boy to know if he was a first time offender,or a hardened criminal that makes a living from stealing? What if the car the boy was breaking into was the final big retirement purchase the old man had worked so hard for years to save up for,and it was his last purchase that would last him till he died, or wasn't fit to drive anymore? It's not just the vehicle, you see. It's what the VEHICLE REPRESENTS and HOW HE got it.... What he had to do without while saving for it....the extra overtime hours he spent working to save for it.

    If stolen, or damaged,now he would be looking at having to spend money for a rental car while his insurance claim is being processed. And do you think the insurance company is going down to the local car dealer and buy him a new one? No, the car is now a "used car", so they will deduct some money, therefore he has lost some more from the punk's actions.

    In my opinion, no crook has the right to steal THAT much from anybody! If they want to be a crook for a career, they have to understand that career choice comes with consequences. They have to weigh it out, NOT ME!!

  4. #53
    On this board and many othes I cannot help but get the impression that too many posters, rather than looking for a reason to have to use their gun are looking for an excuse to be able to use it. On the average while driving to and from work I could be involved in two or three accidents where is would clearly be the other person's fault. However I try to avoid those. We should look at guns the same way and not when can we use it but when do we need to.

  5. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northeastern United States.
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by GOV5 View Post
    " I do not own anything in the way of property that is worth taking a life for"

    First of all, I personally agree overall, but specifically it depends on the crime. We have gotten WAY too lax on crime in this nation. How was that man that shot the boy to know if he was a first time offender,or a hardened criminal that makes a living from stealing? What if the car the boy was breaking into was the final big retirement purchase the old man had worked so hard for years to save up for,and it was his last purchase that would last him till he died, or wasn't fit to drive anymore? It's not just the vehicle, you see. It's what the VEHICLE REPRESENTS and HOW HE got it.... What he had to do without while saving for it....the extra overtime hours he spent working to save for it.

    If stolen, or damaged,now he would be looking at having to spend money for a rental car while his insurance claim is being processed. And do you think the insurance company is going down to the local car dealer and buy him a new one? No, the car is now a "used car", so they will deduct some money, therefore he has lost some more from the punk's actions.

    In my opinion, no crook has the right to steal THAT much from anybody! If they want to be a crook for a career, they have to understand that career choice comes with consequences. They have to weigh it out, NOT ME!!
    On the other hand,we could what if this all day, What if this kids only motivation was hunger. Not a criminal.not even the average punk on the street. In an unusual situation. Just hungry. You wouldn't know that until it was too late. I for one, am not going to shoot someone unless there is absolutly, positively, without a dought no other defence. Then it will swift and deadly. I've read that shooting someone can leave you bankrupt defending your self even if your right. What happens to your property then? Just my oppinion folks. This is the kind of discusion we come here for.

  6. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Bangba View Post
    On the other hand,we could what if this all day, What if this kids only motivation was hunger. Not a criminal.not even the average punk on the street. In an unusual situation. Just hungry. You wouldn't know that until it was too late. I for one, am not going to shoot someone unless there is absolutly, positively, without a dought no other defence. Then it will swift and deadly. I've read that shooting someone can leave you bankrupt defending your self even if your right. What happens to your property then? Just my oppinion folks. This is the kind of discusion we come here for.
    Hunger isn't a reason to steal. There are charities in every city that feed people every day. I know. I worked at one. That's some of that "feel good" stuff that's been jammed down our throats for years by people that don't want us to have guns. Don't fall for that rhetoric.

    Now, I agree with you on the "think before you shoot" issue. And that thinking starts before you start carrying. You need to understand in this "sue crazy" country in which we live, it is WAY too easy for someone to come after you in court. Our court & legal system is out of control. There is no way someone should be able to sue you in civil court if you have been found not guilty in criminal court. It's double jeopardy, and that should be unconstitutional. It is, but it hasn't been upheld by the courts.

    Be like it or not, when you shoot someone, there iis a high degree of probability you are going to court. So be ready to do so when you pull that trigger.

  7. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northeastern United States.
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by gov5 View Post
    hunger isn't a reason to steal. There are charities in every city that feed people every day. I know. I worked at one. That's some of that "feel good" stuff that's been jammed down our throats for years by people that don't want us to have guns. Don't fall for that rhetoric.

    Now, i agree with you on the "think before you shoot" issue. And that thinking starts before you start carrying. You need to understand in this "sue crazy" country in which we live, it is way too easy for someone to come after you in court. Our court & legal system is out of control. There is no way someone should be able to sue you in civil court if you have been found not guilty in criminal court. It's double jeopardy, and that should be unconstitutional. It is, but it hasn't been upheld by the courts.

    Be like it or not, when you shoot someone, there iis a high degree of probability you are going to court. So be ready to do so when you pull that trigger.

    wow!!!

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northeastern United States.
    Posts
    64
    GOV5 Quote............. WE, as CCW holders, are not "associate" cops or vigilantes. And having the "right" to shoot someone doesn't give you a moral/religious "right" to end someone's life. There are young folks out there that have been influenced by misguided people, and those young folks need someone to show them the LIGHT. They are still young and most of them, not all, are still salvageable. I would hate to snuff out of the life of someone that GOD isn't finished with yet. Remember, there is a difference between "KILL" and "MURDER".[/QUOTE]


    So if your just hungry Your salvageable. Well thats better.

  9. #58
    "So if your just hungry Your salvageable. Well thats better."

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX B N M

    Sorry, I don't understand what you said. Can you explain?

  10. #59
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Whichever of you members said there is a difference between murder and killing is exactly right and I wish the religiously informed among the populace got this right. The true translation of the words on the commandments is murder--it is the only word that makes sense--ie we kill chickens, we kill cows, we kill deer etc etc--yet we do not consider these acts as a defiance of the commandment. Murder means intent on an immoral basis. Killing someone when you are not in imminent danger of your own life or great bodily injury, IMO, is going to be a subject for a jury to decide whether the act was a justifiable killing or murder (albeit manslaughter).

  11. #60
    " Whichever of you members said there is a difference between murder and killing is exactly right..."

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX B N M

    It was me. I hate when two different terms are tossed around like they are the same thing. Either one though, has a serious consequence and effect on the one left living. It is a decision that very few will know of which they are certain, until the time the moment of truth comes. I can talk all day long about what I will do, but until the time faces me, I don't know how I will act.

Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast