Maybe a little "Who's there" might have helped before a round or two was shot off. The stepfather should be tried for manslaughter if not murder and spend a few decades in the big house as far as I'm concerned.
yes because its easy to know what to do after something has already happened. damn it why couldnt he just have psychic skills, he needs to work on knowing the future a little better. it must be so easy knowing what you would do even though you were never put in that situation before lmao.
I would never put myself in that situation lmao. If he had the time to go to his gun safe (if he had one) or to where he keeps his guns, he would have had time to ask who's there. Lock to moron up.
From the article linked in the OP. I do not see where the "Make my Day" law applies here. The girl was not even trespassing. I tend to think that the shooter was negligent. No such thing as an "accident" in these type of cases.
These "accidents" are a very common occurance. People should know that keeping a loaded gun at hand in their home to keep their family "safe" may well actually accomplish the exact opposite.
nobody puts themselves in the situation to get their homes broken into, but morons put themselves in the situations to get shot by sneaking into homes. again, why do you always blame homeowners for protecting themselves but never blame the idiot who is sneaking into the home for getting shot? again, its easy for someone like yourself who has never faced a situation in which someone is trying to sneak into your home to pass judgement like you know exactly what and how you would do things. but hey, keep pretending to be righteous, its rather funny.
How do you clearly identify a target in a dark house? Maybe he could have identified that himself and the fact that he had a weapon, but lets just say it wasn't his step-daughter and in a fact a trespasser bent on harm, then a tactical advantage has been given away. Its easy to judge a man's actions when you're not in his shoes. But we are probably talking about something that happened in a matter of seconds, not to mention the adrenaline and fear involved when in a situation like this.
"because I want to avoid all the partisan crap that the subject of gun control generates amongst Americans" So much for respectful debate! Need more information on this one like how she got in ( as in how much noise was made/ broken window etc) and how much time transpired between that and the shooting. One also has to ask why a child so young was sneaking in at 6 am. Where was she all night? Why didnt he know. Did she never hear of a thing called a key?
If you find someone entering your home the very least you should do is ask them to identify themselves before gunning them down. They could be a confused elderly person suffering from a degenerative mental illness or someone experiencing psychosis or someone seeking assistance after an accident or a dumb kid from an abusive home trying to prove something. You can't know until you check.
Again i think more info is needed.. A highly doubt a 10 year vet got nervous over a little noise and went in all guns blazing.
This is where you are wrong, again. I have been in a situation where someone did sneak into my house. My wife and I were asleep upstairs and someone broke in downstairs and took about $2000 worth of stuff. We were totally unaware until my wife went downstairs in the morning. It made matters worse because we aren't citizens in this country and police were less than helpful, the police asked for quite a bit of money to investigate the robbery, but I never had the urge to take a gun and shoot someone. The possessions stolen were material things, easily replaced.
I'm all for understanding your surroundings and target but that has to be some serious insanity involved. So if a group of gangbangers burst in your home do you pull out the Rorschach test? With reality as a basis realize Barney Fife and sheriff Taylor would not survive long in today's new society. Makes good tv tho. Bottom line, I think the shooter was indeed in the wrong. Not only did he not understand his target he did not understand his surroundings. A gun owner with the desire to use a gun as home protection should understand all the occupants of the home and the "possibilities" that can occur. It's not uncommon for teenagers to be sneaking in or out. This must be taken into account long before the need for defense is ever realized. A plan, strategy with rules of conduct should be rationalized by the owner accounting for as many scenarios as possible. Rule 1 for those with other family members living in the home. Verify your target. Yes that can easily put you at a disadvantage. That's the price you pay for having loved ones,,,,,alive. I would not judge the man too harshly but he failed and you can be assured he understand that now.
Police believe they were kids. I have some very expensive photographic equipment which was looked at (the bag was left unzipped) and a cupboard where I keep some stuff intact. The housekeeping kitty with the equivalent of about 50 bucks in cash wasn't touched. Mobile phones, iPod, point and shot camera, laptop and my $40 Mont Blanc watch taken.
My initial reaction to this post was to simply report you for gratuitous personal attack, but I have been posting on these boards since I was like 12, have yet to report a post, and I am not going to break my rule for you. So could you tell me exactly what it is you find disgusting - making a thread about this event, or giving an opinion upon the matter? And how exactly is examining this event achievng 'selfish political gain' or 'self-aggarndisement'? And what makes this matter different from the threads reporting Trayvon Martin, et.al? You have made a written defamation of me personally and publicly - thereby committing libel - now justify it, or, if you have a shred of decency, print a retraction and apology.
What was disrespectful about wishing to avoid this topic descending into a partisan and ideological verbal battle between pro-gun and anti-gun proponents? If I had posted this in the gun-control subforum, it would be interpreted as taking a position on gun control ideology, rather than examing the legal aspects. So much for common sense!
LEGALLY: In my state, he would not be charged as long as he believed his house was being broken into. Relevant legislation: § 14‑51.1. Use of deadly physical force against an intruder. (a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruders unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence. (b) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section. RESPONSIBLY: Even though not required by law, he should have notified the intruder that he had detected the intrusion, was armed, and intended to shoot if the intruder did not cease, desist and leave the property immediately. A simple "stop or I'll shoot" may have well been answered by a "don't shoot! it's me!", and this needless tragedy avoided.
What if he did identify the person, and that person was trying to steal his TV? Would that be a license to shoot and kill them? I believe that shooting people for petty reasons is immoral -- whether they're criminal or not -- and this is why so many family members get shot in the home.
That is exactly what the investigation will cover, what was the stepfathers situation. My personal experience in a situation when someone breaks into your house depends on if you were awaken from a dead sleep, and the last thing you would want to do is turn a light on because your eyes are adjusted to the dark, which would allow you to be able to see a shadowed image, and if it were a perpetrator, their movements should be evident enough for the homeowner to establish if it were a family member or a criminal. I personally do not have my home defense weapon equipped with any laser sight or light because it will give your position away. I instead opt for tritium sights on my weapon, which is a 45 caliber Kimber. I only mention the gun because a 45 at close range will be a solid kill, and being a Kimber, the likelihood of a round jamming are slim to none. I keep my pistol in a "cocked and locked" position at all times, so with a flick of my thumb it is ready to fire. This will be investigated to establish the situation and if there was evidence that it was just a tragic accident, or a case for involuntary manslaughter, we will see.
Interesting. I've never heard of police demanding money to investigate a crime. Such crimes are supposedly against the state, so it makes no sense. Edit: Sorry, I just noticed you are in Laos. It's a shame that you have to pay for police protection: seems like double victimization to me.
Not true, most home shooting are from an accidental discharge. If you have evidence that I am wrong, please post it. BTW, you break into my house and I get the drop on you, a body bag will be your exit, I will take no prisoners if you break into my house
Possibilities: 1. PTSD 2. Stepfather 3. Other The one who is not to blame is the stepdaughter. If the stepfather cannot tell the difference between family or intruder, he should not own a gun, much less handle one. Too many innocent people will get killed and the family is luck only that the stepdaughter was killed. For the stepfather, his course is clear. His only solution to make right the entire situation is to take his own life with seppuku. He cannot blame anyone else but himself for the tragedy. To do so otherwise, would make the tragedy even worse and for the mother of the child to seek divorce form him with him going to an insande assylum to deal with his grief. This choice would not be deemed honorable and thus, all associations with his military rank, pay, and benefits should be confiscated immideately and denied any and all services for his actions.
