The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old June 19, 2009, 09:05 AM   #76
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Quote:
got some facts to support that
GEEZ!!!
Quote:
I seriously doubt he WANTED to take a life and I seriously doubt that he was thumping his chest afterwards.
Quote:
Now really...really...got some facts to support that? On the other hand, can we infer that by coming out with a gun against (as we understand it) an unarmed teenager he wanted to do a bit more than stroke the kids hair...read the article (FWIW) carefully by the way as to the psychosocial circumstances in that neighborhood
Come da heck on! Even the most liberal jewish kid from New York city wouldn't say this and also own a gun shop!
we go out of our safe spot with a gun because we do not know if we need it or not! We do not grab the gun thinkin' "I GITS TO KILLZ ME SOME IDIOT" I have never fired on a person knockin on my door but better than a hundred have seen my weapon as I decided it best to be prepared than unarmed!
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 09:06 AM   #77
Zilmo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 30, 2009
Location: At home.
Posts: 369
I shoot at everybody that comes in my yard.
Zilmo is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 09:13 AM   #78
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
Why does this one guy keep talking about how did the shooter benefit from the situation? Since when do good guys shoot bad guy for some sort of benefit? Again you have to look at this situation as two seperate incidents. The young man was trespassing and potentially stealing from him, so by confronting him he stood to 'benefit' by not having his crap stolen. Then the young man caused him to fear for his life so he fired. I suppose you could say he benefitted by not getting potentially beat to death.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 10:11 AM   #79
Donn_N
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
Quote:
Why does this one guy keep talking about how did the shooter benefit from the situation? Since when do good guys shoot bad guy for some sort of benefit?
I keep talking about it, because it is relevant. If there is no benefit to confronting and shooting the BG and there are definite drawbacks, why would you do it?

I mean think about your usual day. How many times during the day do you intentionally act in such a way that the most likely outcome will be to your detriment? Rarely, if ever. Why should this situation be any different?

I don't understand the mindset that says, I must go out and confront this crackhead when the predictable negative results will far outweigh any positive results.

Quote:
The young man was trespassing and potentially stealing from him, so by confronting him he stood to 'benefit' by not having his crap stolen. Then the young man caused him to fear for his life so he fired. I suppose you could say he benefitted by not getting potentially beat to death.
But do the "benefits" outweigh the drawbacks?

Last edited by Donn_N; June 19, 2009 at 10:16 AM. Reason: Additions
Donn_N is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 10:21 AM   #80
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
That is a matter of opinion, and as I stated before none of us can say exactly what we would do in a similar situation unless we have been in it already. Nor can we even then say what we would have done in his exact same position. When he confronted him initially the benefit did outweigh the potential downside because at that time the only assumed downside was losing whatever the perp took. When he confronted him the second time the benefit did not outweight the reasonable outcome, BUT how do we know the perp would not have escalated the situation on his own, obviously there is a gap between not waiting long enough and waiting too long. But when the decision was made to fire, it was because the perp was approaching him. At THAT point the benefit of living DOES outweigh the cost of potentially killing the perp.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 10:36 AM   #81
cloud8a
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 341
Sounds to me this kid was turning into a little Ken McElroy. Anyone remember who he was and what happened to him?

I still would have called the cops and maybe then went outside just to keep him talking garbage in my yard. He would be there when the cops pulled up and then placed in jail. After that though there would probably be retaliation to deal with from the teen and his buddies. Who knows when it would come.
cloud8a is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 10:54 AM   #82
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
After that though there would probably be retaliation to deal with from the teen and his buddies. Who knows when it would come.
Exactly ! This is why the homeowner did the right thing, instead of cowering "safely" inside his home, and waiting on police like a coward, he charged outside and protected his property!

And now those thugs Know that this guy means business. I'll bet they will think twice before trying any retaliatory strike on this old oxygen-deprived patriot.

__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
OuTcAsT is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 11:01 AM   #83
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
I just have to say I don't think staying inside and waiting for the police should be automatically classified as cowering and being a coward. I mean going Clint Eastwood with your vintage garand is not always the best decision.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 11:10 AM   #84
Shadi Khalil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 4,974
A few years back a friend of mine was leaving my house after a skins game and got jumped by three teenagers. He ran back to the house and my roommates some other friends and I came out and confronted the assailants. They stood in our yard cursing and yelling, there were shoves and punches thrown but once one of the girls let the dog out they left. A few hours later, my GF and I were smoking on the front porch when two of them showed back up in our lawn, cursing and threating us. Then one of them pulled out a knife and began waving it around. I shoved my GF in the door, locked it and my roommates called the police.

Now when this happened I was armed and the one waving the knife was about 20 feet away from me. I never once thought of pulling my gun or even sweeping my shirt over to be ready. My first thought was to get the girl through that door and to lock it. If I had remained outside allowing the situation to escalate and the knife wielder was shot as a result, I would have been fully responsible for that boys life.

From the facts we have, the old man was already safe inside his house. He was obviously armed and able to defend himself. He had access to a phone and from what I read its a high crime neighborhood so chances are a unit was near by. Age is not a factor here since HE confronted the boy the second time.

Also, I'm not buying the whole crack pipe story. I'm just basing that on my gut.
Shadi Khalil is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 11:20 AM   #85
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
Yea I agree that the pipe should be pretty easy to produce and would help his story. The fact that there hasn't been much of an official statement yet is somewhat shady. Also from what I have read a neighbor tried to stop the bleeding, so did that neighbor witness and immediately run over, or just hear the shot (who goes outside after hearing a gunshot??). Maybe more details will come out but it sounds like most of us can agree that the older man probably SHOULD have stayed in side the disagreement is coming in whether he committed a crime or not. I personally do not think he did legally. Morally, well I can't judge another mans actions based on my morals, that is up to the man upstairs.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 11:50 AM   #86
john in jax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2005
Posts: 1,099
The Castle Doctrine is a wonderful bit of legislation.

2 men argued - - one man decided to escalate by advancing - - he died. The dead could have chosen to leave, diffusing the situation. He could have simple sat on the ground in an un-threatening manor. He could have made any number of decision, but he made the conscious choice to advance on what appeared to be a frail old man and got shot for it - - I've got no problem with the shooting - a moron made a idiotic decision to advance on a guy with a gun and got himself removed from the gene pool, that outcome is preferable to me than the old man becoming a victim.

I'm not advocating that you go around armed and confronting people, but if you are acting legally (and apparently he was) and are threatened by an individual (as reported) then I believe you should be able take any and all steps you feel you need to in order to defend yourself.
__________________
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards. Claire Wolfe
john in jax is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 11:58 AM   #87
Shadi Khalil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 4,974
I swear if I here the words "good/bad guy" again.....:barf:

Quote:
he charged outside and protected his property!
So a truck is more valuable to you then human life? That's too bad.
Shadi Khalil is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:28 PM   #88
Donn_N
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
Quote:
I'm not advocating that you go around armed and confronting people,
but if you are acting legally (and apparently he was)
So it is okay to go around armed and confronting people as long as it legal, regardless of the potential outcome.

Quote:
and are threatened by an individual (as reported) then I believe you should be able take any and all steps you feel you need to in order to defend yourself.
Excluding, apparently, just staying inside which would have been the best way to defend himself.

Just because you are acting legally, doesn't mean you are acting prudently or reasonably.
Donn_N is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:28 PM   #89
OuTcAsT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2006
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
I just have to say I don't think staying inside and waiting for the police should be automatically classified as cowering and being a coward.
Nor do I, Did you see the little smiley guy on my post?

Quote:
he charged outside and protected his property!
So a truck is more valuable to you then human life? That's too bad.
Again I reference the little smiley guy rolling his eyes.


The old man was wrong to go outside his home and confront the second time around. Stay inside, call 911, and protect your life from inside, while he likely will be legally OK, His decision is the reason this escalated to a shooting.
__________________
WITHOUT Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech. Silence Dogood

Does not morality imply the last clear chance? - WildAlaska -
OuTcAsT is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:34 PM   #90
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Quote:
Sounds to me this kid was turning into a little Ken McElroy. Anyone remember who he was and what happened to him?


Why wait till they are teens...lets start executing bullies in 2nd grade

The bloodthirstyness I see among gun owners is scary.

WildmaybeitscuzimolderAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:42 PM   #91
Shadi Khalil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
Again I reference the little smiley guy rolling his eyes.
Missed that the first time, sorry.

Shadi Khalil is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:42 PM   #92
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
"So a truck is more valuable to you then human life? That's too bad."

Again he didn't shoot him for trying to steal his truck, he shot him for coming at him.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:49 PM   #93
Shadi Khalil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
The bloodthirstyness I see among gun owners is scary.

I think allot of it is fear based. It comes off as chest thumping bravado, all this talk of "defending me and mine", but anyone who would shoot a boy for being on their property is a very frightened individual. When it comes down to it, thats what it was. It was not an armed person, not a gang of home invaders, nope, just one boy and an alleged crack pipe. How that warrants a death sentence and how people come to that conclusion is beyond me.
Shadi Khalil is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 12:58 PM   #94
Donn_N
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
Quote:
Again he didn't shoot him for trying to steal his truck, he shot him for coming at him.
But he went outside while displaying a weapon to confront the teen why? Not for coming at him since he was in no danger until he left the safety of his home to confront the teen and escalate the situation.

So let's take a look at the pros of going outside:
Possibly will prevent some type of theft.

Now the cons:
Possible injury or death to self
Possible escalation to the point of having to kill someone
Possible criminal charges up to and including murder
Possible retaliation either by the teen (if he hadn't been killed) or his buddies
Possible civil suit
Possible bankruptcy defending criminal and/or civil case
Possible psychological trauma brought on by killing or maiming someone
Possible confiscation of gun by police
Possible escalation of tension and bad blood in an already tense neighborhood

I'm sure I missed some, but you get the idea. Now tell me again why going outside was such a grand idea. I'm still not seeing it.
Donn_N is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:01 PM   #95
verti89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2008
Posts: 157
I never said it was a great idea, in fact said it was a bad idea, but it wasn't a crime.

Also a 17 year old is much closer to a man than a boy. He was definitely more physically capable than the old man. Let's not label this kid a child killer just yet.

I am not saying the guy was making the bst decisions in what he did, or even justified. But I don't think he should be condemned either.
verti89 is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:10 PM   #96
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
No one on here can accuse me of being bloodthirsty. I am far from a raging loon looking for trouble. However, I would not sit in my home and allow a tweeker to damage or destroy my property. I work very hard to have the things I have and I am not going to lose them because some people think I should take the high road when confronted by someone with no regard for me or the things I own.

I would never walk out with an exposed firearm but I would confront the perp immediately after calling police if he was actively engaging in the act of destroying my property (if he is just standing in the street or yard yelling I can ignore that). At that time I would then only use whatever force was appropriate to the situation. If that only included standing between him/her and my personal property or maybe saying "get the hell out of here before I kick your a**" that is where it would stop. if the perp then decided to escalate events to the point here he was a threat to my life I would then respond accordingly.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:10 PM   #97
Rich Miranda
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2008
Location: San Antonio, not San Antone...
Posts: 1,203
Someone who won't leave your property is a trespasser, especially if they aren't armed. Trespassing equals a fine and maybe a few days in jail, not the death penalty.

Also, why weren't the police called after the first incident?

The homeowner may benefit from his reputation as a grandfatherly-type, however.

Finally, who's to say that the teen made any move whatsoever toward the homeowner? We only have one side of the story. Maybe gramps got tired of arguing and offed the kid.
__________________
Read this!: I collect .38 Special and .357 Mag cartridges and I will PAY CASH for the headstamps I don't already have! Please PM me.
Please donate blood, plasma, and platelets - people's lives literally depend on it.
Rich Miranda is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:14 PM   #98
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
I work very hard to have the things I have and I am not going to lose them because some people think I should take the high road when confronted by someone with no regard for me or the things I own.
While I understand and agree with that sentiment, that's why I have insurance. I wouldn't "lose" anything, in fact in some ways the thug would be doing me a favor, since my insurance is full replacement cost I'd be getting newer, better stuff for "free".
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:16 PM   #99
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Quote:
While I understand and agree with that sentiment, that's why I have insurance. I wouldn't "lose" anything, in fact in some ways the thug would be doing me a favor, since my insurance is full replacement cost I'd be getting newer, better stuff for "free"
I hate to break this to you, but insurance isn't free and rates go up and coverage is lost when you actually file a claim. If I let someone trash my car, I might just have to pay a deductible right now but I will be paying for it for a long time to come. That money comes out of my pocket. Why should I just allow someone to take money out of my pocket without any resistance?
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old June 19, 2009, 01:17 PM   #100
Shadi Khalil
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2006
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 4,974
Quote:
I work very hard to have the things I have and I am not going to lose them because some people think I should take the high road when confronted by someone with no regard for me or the things I own.
I just think its allot easier to just call the cops and let them know you are doing so. I would never get between a tweaker and anything.
Shadi Khalil is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12722 seconds with 7 queries