Man kills 2 People While 911 Is Telling Him Not To

[James Boston]

ElSapo-

I don't know...

How do you claim self defense in a potential life threatening situation that you voluntarily entered? If his personal safety was really his top priority, he would have stayed inside.

[ElSapo]

[ QUOTE ]
ElSapo-

I don't know...

How do you claim self defense in a potential life threatening situation that you voluntarily entered? If his personal safety was really his top priority, he would have stayed inside.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what happens after he leaves the house and before the shooting. Yes, he made a mistake by leaving the house. I agree with that.

Legally though, and perhaps in his own morality, he felt he could and should try and stop them. Once that decision is made, the situation evolves.

Once he's outside and saying, "stop" then things happen. I don't know how it goes from there. But was he within his rights to try and stop them? I don't know. I think he has a strong case, and when I listen to the tape I hear a lot more than just an idiot with a gun.

Although, I think I also hear that part.

[James Boston]

ElSapo-

I guess my biggest issue here is that he seemed very aware of what he was walking into and what the likely outcome would be. My opinion would probably be different if he had made some type of gut reaction to grab his gun and attempt to stop a robery in progress, but he didn't. His first thought was to call the police. Then, after being told to stay inside and being told the police were coming, he decided to take matters into his own hands. We can't know if he had already made up his mind about shooting the men as he left his house. I feel like we do know 2 things though:

1) His safety wasn't really his top priority, or he wouldn't have gone outside.
2) He can't fully claim that he was the only one in a position to stop the act, given that he was told the police were almost there.

I guess my whole point is that he tried to stop them because he wanted to, not because he had to or needed to. Knowing he was entering into a situation that he acknowledged would likely merit self defense, and taking it upon himself to do so, doesn't seem reasonable or seem like a valid defense.

[ElSapo]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my whole point is that he tried to stop them because he wanted to, not because he had to or needed to. Knowing he was entering into a situation that he acknowledged would likely merit self defense, and taking it upon himself to do so, doesn't seem reasonable or seem like a valid defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is really important. There's a very strong argument that he created the situation himself. Now, you can also argue that that's complete BS - two thieves with criminal backgrounds created the situation.

But I actually agree with you, that essentially he put himself in a situation that very likely could lead to a need for violence. (Or even an unnecessary, kneejerk, nervous violent reaction)

I don't know how this will play out of course. I guess it just doesn't seem so clear to me. No, money and posessions are not worth someone's life. But I also understand the feeling that you should do something, to not feel helpless, to not want to sit there and wait while the police are still on the way.

Ugly situation.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
ElSapo-

I don't know...

How do you claim self defense in a potential life threatening situation that you voluntarily entered? If his personal safety was really his top priority, he would have stayed inside.

[/ QUOTE ]

so what you're saying is that if a hot chick wears a short skirt and a tube top and then walks around East Palo Alto at night, it's not rape if she gets raped.

[PartyGirlUK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ElSapo-

I don't know...

How do you claim self defense in a potential life threatening situation that you voluntarily entered? If his personal safety was really his top priority, he would have stayed inside.

[/ QUOTE ]

so what you're saying is that if a hot chick wears a short skirt and a tube top and then walks around East Palo Alto at night, it's not rape if she gets raped.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a better analogy would be a hot chick going inside the private residence of a known sex offender, then claiming she had to kill him before he assaulted her.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]


I think a better analogy would be a hot chick going inside the private residence of a known sex offender, then claiming she had to kill him before he assaulted her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea I see what you're saying here and it makes lots of sense. Once those criminals trespassed on the shooter's property, the property became the criminals' property and not the property of the shooter.

[ChicagoTroy]

I don't understand some of you guys at all, except from an emotional "Violence is always bad" perspective. I especially don't get the gun control angle. Shotguns are legal everywhere. I live in one of the most restrictive jurisdictions anywhere and people have them.

The guy called the cops. The cops weren't going to get there in time. If he was watching his neighbor getting raped, voluntarily "entering a potentially life-threatening situation" would have been perfectly justified. Refusing to enter a dangerous situation you are completely prepared to deal with is pussified.

The fact that it was thievery and not rape or murder he was preventing complicates things. If the theives were trying to burn the house down, I'd have intervened. Light his car on fire, I'd have intervened. But if the car was a $200 beater, maybe not, because I would understand the possibility of having my hand forced and people dying over somebody getting away with torching a beater isn't worth it to me. But I could understand somebody else coming to a different conclusion.

With a home invasion, it's a little confusing, but I can certainly understand where someone might come to the decision of stopping the theives.

I also understand his reaction to the 911 operator who (foolishly, IMO) said "You're going to get shot." Someobdy with a shotgun and the drop on the theives is probably not going to get shot. "It's not worth somebody getting killed over, we're almost there" might have played better.

Once he went outside, I have no idea what happened apart from the fact that it appears he told them to stop. Given he called the cops, and gave a verbal warning, and is the guy looking out for his neighbor rather than robbing him, he certainly gets the benefit of the doubt from me. If it turns out they froze and he just murdered them, he should pay the price for that. But jumping to that conclusion makes zero sense to me given the facts. They probably did something stupid and got shot. That's unfortunate, but their own fault. Don't be stupid.

[El Diablo]

CT,

"If he was watching his neighbor getting raped, voluntarily "entering a potentially life-threatening situation" would have been perfectly justified."

Of course, I don't see why you think anyone here would disagree.

"'It's not worth somebody getting killed over, we're almost there' might have played better."

He said that as well:
"Don't go outside"
"They're getting away!"
"That's alright. Property's not worth killing someone over"
"They got a bag of loot!"

[ChicagoTroy]

[ QUOTE ]
CT,

"If he was watching his neighbor getting raped, voluntarily "entering a potentially life-threatening situation" would have been perfectly justified."

Of course, I don't see why you think anyone here would disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was responding to the absudity of blaming somebody for entering "a potentially dangerous situation."
[ QUOTE ]
"'It's not worth somebody getting killed over, we're almost there' might have played better."

He said that as well:
"Don't go outside"
"They're getting away!"
"That's alright. Property's not worth killing someone over"
"They got a bag of loot!"

[/ QUOTE ]
I know, I just thought appealing to the guy's sense of self-preservation was likely to generate the opposite response.

All,

I don't think some people are considering that "I am going to go and stop them by threatening them with my shotgun" is NOT (edit, sorry) the same thing as "I am going to go outside and kill those guys." He could easily have been just planning to detain them, and was prepared to shoot them if they did something nutty like rushing him.

It's not a matter of "I'm going to kill them to save my neighbor's stereo," so much as "I'm not going to just sit here and let them rob my neighbor."