It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"You're dead," Minnesota Homeowner Told Teen Burglar

page: 23
48
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:16 PM
link   
while I can certainly understand those standing in support of his right to self defense.... that pretty much goes out the door after he's shot both, drug their boddies into his basement worksop only to shoot them again... ensuring a clean kill.... as later remarked about and referenced in his testimony/statement to police.

he likened it to deer hunting and ensuring a 'clean kill'

WTH!!

that's not Home or Self defense. !!???

that's outright murder... no matter his 'state of mind, victimization, etc.

????




posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   
All you people who keep saying that this guy is guilty of murder...
PLEASE PLEASE justify these scumbags breaking into his house


JUSTIFY IT!!!



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: HomerinNC
All you people who keep saying that this guy is guilty of murder...
PLEASE PLEASE justify these scumbags breaking into his house


JUSTIFY IT!!!


no justification needed. they were in the wrong.

at the start.

once in the house and he shot them it became a different scenario altogether.

home/self defense.

wher that aspect/defense goes out the window is after he shot them both, drug their bodies into another room and proceeded to shoot them again 'to finish them off'

I can understand his frustrations, given the previous multiple break in and whatnot, but i can't support his actions after he'd already shot them and they were lying on the floor.

[ETA]

no matter and despite the state this took place in, you can't simply shoot an intruder, put their wounded/dying body on a tarp, drag them to another room and 'calmly' put a pistol under their chin 'to finish them off'.

that's where it becomes murder. no matter who they are or what they did.

premeditated? likely not. as it's not like he 'orchestrated' the events.

they did.

he just took things too far and will now pay for it with time.


edit on 4/23/2014 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
"No, this man will hopefully be going to jail for breaking the law by going far beyond the realm of self defence by executing these teens after he had admittedly completely incapacitated them."


I guess he should have trapped them in a " humane" net of some sort and tickled them till the police arrived, huh? "Elderly Man Kills Two Burglars During Break In" ,and you found a way to defend the burglars. You should be chasing an ambulance somewhere.
edit on 23-4-2014 by Skymoonwalker because: Spacing

edit on 23-4-2014 by Skymoonwalker because: Quote



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: HomerinNC
All you people who keep saying that this guy is guilty of murder...
PLEASE PLEASE justify these scumbags breaking into his house


JUSTIFY IT!!!


Homer, I like you, but in this case, you are getting to emotional about it. No one has had a problem with the initial shots fired. It was Mr. Smiths Coup de Grace that is the issue. And the fact that he recorded it all and even has admitted to the executions.

I haven't seen one post by any member trying to justify some one breaking into his house. I've been following this thread all day.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: TDawgRex

originally posted by: clay2 baraka

This SOB is sick, what's worse are the gun nuts on this forum that condone execution style murder.
sick..


Please back off on the "Gun Nuts" verbiage. Many of us here calling out Mr. Smith are responsible gun owners. And we are using the facts as they are known.

But with all groups, there are bad apples.


I don't consider responsible owners "gun nuts." Just those that blindly crusade the right to a free-for-all, wild west society.

Like those that defend this sicko.

In other words, not you.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: HomerinNC

You must have missed the numerous posts where we have said that the teens were doing the wrong thing, no question and the homeowner had the right to defend himself according to law. But you seem to be ignoring the part where the owner went far beyond the law and executed the teens after he had incapacitated them.

He broke the law and he should be punished for it. Period.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Skymoonwalker

I guess he should have trapped them in a " humane" net of some sort and tickled them till the police arrived, huh? "Elderly Man Kills Two Burglars During Break In" ,and you found a way to defend the burglars. You should be chasing an ambulance somewhere.


Wow, the denseness of some people astounds me.

I'd respond to this but I feel like a broken record, I've already answered this type of nonsense a million times in this thread, I'm not playing the game any more.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

I disagree, shoot to kill the hell with everything else. Even if he went to the extreme like he did, I dont see any reason he should be punished. You can see this guy was at his wit's end.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: HomerinNC

He took the time to worry about his bloody carpet. Wits end? I think not.

Oh yeah and there's that pesky thing called the LAW which states that he can defend himself until the threat is removed. He admitted that they were no threat after he had already blasted both of them with his shotgun yet proceeded on to execute them anyway.

Sorry mate but you're dead wrong and you're letting emotion override logic and facts in this case.



edit on 23/4/2014 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   
This is one of those cases where the population will be divided. Here is how I look at it: everyone has a right to protect their homes and especially their families. If someone breaks into your home there is no time to stop and ask questions. You know that what is occurring is no accident. You don't accidentally break in to someone's house. You have to assume the worst in such a situation, and protecting your home means you should be able to shoot intruders. How many instances have there been of intruders killing those who live in the house they are burglarizing? It happens all the time.

I don't think the home owner should have to wait around to figure out whether the burglars are armed and whether they intend to kill their victims, because doing so could mean your own life. Why should someone who is in their own home, minding their own business, have to risk being shot and killed because someone decided to break the law and enter their home? You have to assume that if someone is willing to go that far, they may be willing to go even further. And this had already happened to the guy multiple times.

I think that he showed at least some calmness, considering the fact that he didn't shoot anyone on multiple occasions when he was burglarized. Enough is enough is what he probably thought. With all that said, some will be angry because of what the guy said afterward, and that he obviously showed no remorse for taking the lives of these two individuals. But should he have?

IMO premeditated murder is not the same thing as defending your home. How is it that the law in the US allows a police officer to shoot someone under any circumstance, even if the person is handcuffed and lying on the ground, and get away with it, but when someone shoots someone who illegally enters their home with malicious intent, the victim goes on trial for murder? I cannot believe they're even trying the man to be honest. This is nothing like the Zimmerman case, where obviously the shooter was in the wrong in multiple instances. This is simply a person standing up to criminals not only on his own property, but in his own home.

Whether or not he showed remorse for his actions makes no difference. Whether he shot to kill makes no difference. Even if the things he said do not seem right to everyone, which they weren't really, makes no difference. None of that changes the facts of the case. I mean what is someone supposed to do in those circumstances? Anything other than shooting the perpetrators means you are risking your life. Why should a random citizen have to be thrust into a situation where their life is potentially at stake, a situation they did nothing to bring about, and then have to risk it even further by not taking action?
edit on 4/23/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties
a reply to: macman

In which case you should and would rightfully be tried for premeditated murder, as this owner is.

God I'm glad I don't live in America, surrounded by psychopaths with no regard for the law - and i'm not just talking about the thieves here.


I'm glad you don't live here either.

I'll consider all local opinions good and bad before yours.

After reading this entire thread I've concluded you have much time on your hands.

Thanks for showing so much passion in regards to incident that occurred in a country you detest living in.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: TiedDestructor

After reading this entire thread I've concluded you have much time on your hands.


Says the person who allegedly just took the time to read all 23 pages of this thread......


I'll give you points for diligence though, it appears you are one of the few who actually took the time to read it all. Perhaps you could now apply that diligence to reading up on the Minnesota law regarding intruders and self defence?



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

He didn't shoot them with his shotgun, but rather a Mini-14. Pretty much a varmit rifle. If he had a shotgun, he wouldn't have had to shoot them again. Just sayin'.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: TDawgRex

I thought it was a shotty, my bad. Whatever he used still incapacitated them.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: TiedDestructor

After reading this entire thread I've concluded you have much time on your hands.


Says the person who allegedly just took the time to read all 23 pages of this thread......


I'll give you points for diligence though, it appears you are one of the few who actually took the time to read it all. Perhaps you could now apply that diligence to reading up on the Minnesota law regarding intruders and self defence?


Thanks.


I tend not to take things so personally. Even in my own country.

It's kind of counter-productive.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Sorry if this has been posted, but if this is an old story how did it turn out? Is the old man in prison, still awaiting trial, or set free?

23 pages & I don't have the time to read every post.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

Again...another who has not read the article, or any of the updated links.

Mr. Smith admitted to the police that he executed them, like a animal, to put them out of their misery.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

He's on his second day of trial.

But if you find the time. The thread is interesting.



posted on Apr, 23 2014 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: TDawgRex

Thanks for info. I'll probably read the entire thread when I get the chance but I dunno how much I can take of this camp Vs that camp type posts. It all becomes very redundant.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join