http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2528912/Pictured-Girl-14-shot-dead-stepfather-mistaken-burglar-trying-sneak-house.html This was discussed at another place, and nearly half the comments were to the effect that it was just an unfortunate accident, and the girl was mostly to blame for 'sneaking out'. I do not agree - I believe the stepfather was in the wrong for not identifying his target before opening fire. This is a tragedy, and I have deliberately not raised it in the gun control sub-forum, because I want to avoid all the partisan crap that the subject of gun control generates amongst Americans. I feel that the step-father's actions were little short of criminal, and that he should be charged accordingly. What is your opinion?
Every accident whether auto or gun is usually avoidable with proper hindsight. But humans are fallible and make mistakes. Unfortunately liberals want to use every gun accident as a excuse to ban guns so a non-partisan discussion of the subject is not impossible.
Tragic accident. Very sad story but the girl should have not been sneaking in and out her home. I wonder what kind of neighborhood they live in to be honest. They could very well live in a bad part of town. I also must ask the OP, have you ever been in this situation because you apparently think this is just so easy to deal with?
This is a clear example of 'shoot first, ask questions later' approach to home security and lack of respect for firearms and general fear people have. They both were in the wrong, but the father more so because sneaking out is not punishable by death and the father delivered a death sentence in a court which lasted as long as it took him to pull the trigger in which he was judge, jury and executioner. It IS a tragedy but the tragedy is that this sort of thing happens on average 4-5 times a day across the United States and only the most horrific incidents get national coverage. Otherwise, it's just 'another idiot with a gun'. Why have we marginalized the idiots in this way? Maybe that's a better question to ask in light of this story...
First a general point. At common law and in its contemporary derivatives, negligent killing of one human being by another is considered to be manslaughter. But the specific point - if the legislation in Colorado gives a solid defence to negligent killing in this sort of situation then the stepfather shouldn't be prosecuted (no point in prosecuting a case that's bound to fail). Does that make this anything other than a negligent killing? No, it's negligent to a huge degree, but if the legislation protects the shooter then it's all over in terms of any criminal charges. The law is a ass indeed (at times anyway).
How can it be an accident when someone loses control of their car (not due to alcohol, cell phone, texting or drugs) ? Tragic, but sometimes (*)(*)(*)(*) happens. Hindsight is always better than foresight.
I consider it an accident. When someone is breaking into your house---acting according to "procedure" doesn't happen. You are just scared and wanting to protect yourself and your family. I know its used alot in these arguments (Pools and drownings), but in some incidences when children drown, its considered an accident and in some incidents the parents are seen neglectful. It depends. And cops and prosecuters make the call.
When it comes to firing a weapon, I learned tons of different things, but one I learned is to know your target. If you point a weapon at someone and have intentions of pulling that trigger, you are aiming to kill. I always hate hearing stories like this, because it is people that just shoot and will want to know later. One of the major things I learned was to positively identify and verify my target. This does not seem like verifying ones target. It can be an accident, but at the same, charges can still be brought up, and should be in my opinion.
im sure her stepfather wouldnt have shot if he knew that was his stepdaughter. seriously, that has to be one of the most elementary questions i have ever seen on this forum.
Just another case of someone who is afraid of an intruder Even though he is the one with the gun fear does that to people It makes them trigger happy
but but,,,,, isn't it part of basic fire arm training, identify your target before pulling the trigger?
I very much support the right to bear arms but people should be required to take a firearms safety course before being allowed to carry a hand gun. AboveAlpha
They are required for CC. Unless you were referring to Open Carry then that varies depending on the specific jurisdiction in CO. But that has nothing to do with this thread. You HAVE a gun in your house. You CARRY a gun on the street.
Well OBVIOUSLY....my meaning is specific to before a Police Chief gives out a Hand Gun Permit a person should be required to take a safety course. AboveAlpha
Really it should be stated like this "always be sure of your target; not just the target itself, but above, below, to the left, to the right, in front of, and behind the target". Obviously, that doesn't seem to always happen because we have situations like this.
I agree, but I have to do this... There are plenty of burglaries in Colorado Springs even if you've never heard about it. Colorado Springs man invokes Make My Day Law after break-in Man shoots two intruders COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - Al Michaud is doing just fine after the break-in at his apartment late Monday. The only scar is a bullet hole he put in the wall as he shot two of the intruders. Related Content Police: Homeowner shoots 2 suspects during home invasion "The door opened up quick and three guys came in," recalled Michaud. "That's when the guys said, 'You go back there, I'll take care of him.'" Michaud told KRDO Newschannel 13 that he keeps a .357 pistol close to him because of crime around his apartment complex on East St. Vrain Street near Prairie Avenue. He said he put the gun to use before the intruders could hurt or rob him. "There was one (man) by the door," Michaud said. "I put a bullet in his chest. I was going to shoot the other one in the chest, but the one who was closest to me hit my arm and the gun went off and hit him in his leg." http://www.krdo.com/news/Colorado-Springs-man-invokes-Make-My-Day-Law-after-break-in/-/417220/18060326/-/wlvvqp/-/index.html That stuff happens and I know I'd be glad I was legally allowed not to die in that situation. Liberal gun vultures always take an unfortunate incident like the thread subject here and s h i t on everyone elses right to live when assaulted in your own home. Just wait till people start breaking into liberal neighborhoods(where all the goodies are at) and see what they say then. Just let Dianne Feinstein explain why she needs a gun and you don't... [video=youtube;JhUdUaQvAxo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhUdUaQvAxo[/video]
Nobody was arguing with you then. But as with many lefty/righty contentions it starts as a war of semantics...
When identifying your target could mean your dead before you accomplish the task, I would have to go with a tragic accident. Charges aren't going to do jack compared to the personal pain the dude is going through....
Well that comes down to training really. I'm sure my reaction time when it comes to identifying targets is much quicker then Joe Schmuckatelli who maybe doesn't have that training. I think it all comes down the situation they are in as well. This guy was also an Iraq War Veteran and had more then a decade of service. The problem is, from the reading, no details were really given as to how quickly everything went down and how he reacted. I'm not saying people can't defend themselves, but this was one of those situations where I wish more was known, so I could make a more educated response as to what, if anything, should happen.
I wish I could trust the media to get the story right to begin with..... Every time I read a news article I want to punch a pregnant journalism professor in the stomach.
That's because there are very few actual journalists left. The good old days of journalists doing good work is gone. Here comes the irony, we had this discussion about the state of the profession in my journalism class. My professor, who had 40+ years in the field, even agreed with us. Papers and online news sites care about profit, always have, but it seems they have taken steps away real journalism just to try and improve profits more.
yes, as in make sure you know what you are shooting at that way you dont shoot blindly in the house or into a crowd. Doesnt mean you ask for a form of I.D. before you shoot.
you dont have to issue any warning to someone breaking into your home. Its actually pretty dumb to do so as you dont want to alert the person of where you might be. The only warning needed is if you are sneaking into, or breaking into, someones house is that you might get your ass shot up. what other warning is needed to know that its retarded to be doing such things? why are liberals and anti gun folk so much for criminals rights and the rights of the idiotic over someone lawfully defending themselvess? why do you people ALWAYS want to give the upper hand to criminals and morons?
