View Single Post
Old March 6, 2012, 09:32 AM   #16
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
It seems in this particular case that only two rounds were needed...

Any thoughts going on face value?
Actually, we have no idea how many rounds were needed. We do know (from other articles) that two rounds were fired and struck one of the invaders who died. It may have been that the invaders would have left once they saw the gun or after just one shot being fired.

Quote:
1. Someone taught that kid to shoot and to be decisive. Good for him.
4. Like all predators, BG's don't want to get hurt. Once the prey fought back, the other BG high-tailed it out of there.
Maybe the kid was taught to shoot, maybe not. It really isn't too hard to hit a human-sized target at inside home distances with a rifle (which goes back to Nitesites' reference to other threads which involve the utility of a long gun in home defense). While many rational predators don't want to get hurt, determined and drugged up predators don't always realize they are getting hurt and in the latter case, don't always have any concerns about getting hurt.

Quote:
The linked article is another great example of the low standard of American journalism. It is lacking in reporting the important facts.

How did the invaders gain entrance?
Who were the occupants and how many were in the apartment which was invaded?
What was the weapon used to defend? ".22-caliber rifle" is the inadequate description? It could be a rimfire or any of a number of 22 caliber center fire cartridges.
How or why is shooting the invader in the back justified in this case?

Basic newspaper journalism should objectively report the facts and answer: who, what, when, where and why.
That is a pretty thorough contradiction, Mello2u. In the paper's defense, the paper may not have been provided by the police with the additional information you wanted and the invaded family certainly may not have wanted to speak with the cops.

So you state that journalism needs to meed your 4 W criteria, and then complain because it doesn't answer How.

The article does satisfy your stated criteria...
who - the key players are named
what - home invasion shooting
when - stated in the article
why - self defense

Quote:
How did the invaders gain entrance?
Who were the occupants and how many were in the apartment which was invaded?
What was the weapon used to defend? ".22-caliber rifle" is the inadequate description? It could be a rimfire or any of a number of 22 caliber center fire cartridges.
How or why is shooting the invader in the back justified in this case?
I am not sure that any of this information is particularly necessary to print. Entry was through the door, but the paper didn't waste text in detailing this. No doubt if they would have stated it overtly, you would be complaining that the door's composition and door lock brand name were not stated.

Why do you need to know how many people were in the apartment? Even though the weapon used was stated, you think the information in inadequate. Why does the reader need to know about the cartridge type? If the cartridge type was stated, would you not need to know the construction of the bullet and the velocity at which it left the defender's barrel?

As for how or why shooting the invader in the back is justified, there is no law, not even in Georgia, that states what anatomical areas are illegal to shoot. As the shooting was obviously a self defense shooting against intruders and the law doesn't state anatomical locations, there is no reason to explain why the location of the impact is legal.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04408 seconds with 7 queries