Robbery suspect shot and killed by intended victim

reply to post by Sonya610
Of course they wouldn't lie to you, and naturally they have your best interest at heart. They're just the poor victims of a cruel and corrupt society, and should be pitied rather than held accountable for the violent acts they commit in the name of survival.

I do not have much sympathy for the criminal, also acknowledge he has little to no rights in that situation.

What my issue is related to is; How do you know what he was? He could have been a mass murderer/rapeist/combination scum, he could have been a first time offender in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time.

The fact of the matter is, he attempted to rob, he did not show any sign of attempting to kill (for all we know his gun was imitation, unloaded, safety on and not cocked, even filled with blanks, no one has the answers to these but the police, so pls don't jump to conclusions), he did not kill anyone.

For all you who are religious, you will agree on an eye for an eye. In this case it was not an eye for an eye, since he killed no one, but wound up dead.

My main point is, people who shoot to kill in defence, are playing God and passing judgement on those they kill. Why? because they fell they have some right to take a life, because they posess an weapon capable of doing so.

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat. The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

reply to post by Saf85



so you're saying he should have waited until the robber killed him before defending himself...??

what if next time the victim was YOU ?


[edit on 15-1-2009 by turbokid]

Originally posted by Saf85
I do not have much sympathy for the criminal, also acknowledge he has little to no rights in that situation.

What my issue is related to is; How do you know what he was? He could have been a mass murderer/rapeist/combination scum, he could have been a first time offender in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time.

The fact of the matter is, he attempted to rob, he did not show any sign of attempting to kill (for all we know his gun was imitation, unloaded, safety on and not cocked, even filled with blanks, no one has the answers to these but the police, so pls don't jump to conclusions), he did not kill anyone.

For all you who are religious, you will agree on an eye for an eye. In this case it was not an eye for an eye, since he killed no one, but wound up dead.

My main point is, people who shoot to kill in defence, are playing God and passing judgement on those they kill. Why? because they fell they have some right to take a life, because they posess an weapon capable of doing so.

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat. The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

One, who cares if it was his first time or his 50th, the only similarity is it was his last.

You DON'T SHOOT TO WOUND!!!!! When are people going to realize?

Small caliber, you don't have to worry about hitting someone after it exits your target.

If you can't hit someone that is standing right above you, then you need to stop shooting, driving, and screwing, cause that's an easy target to hit.

Therefore no, you would not miss that target you should always shoot to kill, and they forfeit their life when they pull a gun on you. Fake or not.

reply to post by Saf85


When you pull a gun on someone out of the blue regardless of your intent (to rob, kill, scare), you put your life at risk.

I cannot hope to read the mind of someone pulling a gun on my family and myself. I certainly am not going to wait and see what their intentions are either. I would feel worse if I waited and they killed and/or raped my wife or child than if I kill them and they are innocent. I’ll deal with the killing when I meet my maker and he will know what was in my heart at the time of the killing. What is in my heart at that time is not malice which is possibly what they have if they are out to harm you, but the protection of my family.

Screw those who pull a weapon on someone for ill reasons, they deserve what they get.

Raist

Originally posted by Saf85
I do not have much sympathy for the criminal, also acknowledge he has little to no rights in that situation.

Yes you do, dont lie. Your post is riddled with sympathy for the criminal and NOT the victum.

What my issue is related to is; How do you know what he was? He could have been a mass murderer/rapeist/combination scum, he could have been a first time offender in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time.

The fact of the matter is, he attempted to rob, he did not show any sign of attempting to kill (for all we know his gun was imitation, unloaded, safety on and not cocked, even filled with blanks, no one has the answers to these but the police, so pls don't jump to conclusions), he did not kill anyone.

Pointing a gun at someone is showing a sign that you indend to kill. In this world, in a situation like that its either YOUR life or THEIR life. If YOU want to sit there and cry and pleade and be nicey nice to the criminal - go for it.

Have you ever had a gun pointed at you? EVER? I have. And let me tell you what. You do NOT have even a second to play Mr. Psychologist and figure out if mr. criminal was a poor abused boy growing up or just cant seem to make it in this big bad world...blah blah blah.

Again. It is YOUR life or THEIR life. Sorry, but my life is more important then some thug criminal's life who is pointing a gun at me.

My main point is, people who shoot to kill in defence, are playing God and passing judgement on those they kill. Why? because they fell they have some right to take a life, because they posess an weapon capable of doing so.

I have every damn right to judge anyone I please within the law. And if the government feels like they can trust me with a CWL, then they have deamed me judge of my own life in situations such as this. If the law says I can defend myself with a weapon - I will. And if my life is in jeporady (IE gun pointed at me) I will do whatever it takes to make sure that person NEVER does it again - to me or anyone.

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat. The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

In this case. The victims were in a car - the criminal was outside of aiming a gun at them. You tell me how on flippn earth they are going to have the TIME to get out of their car, walk over and aim at their leg.


Sorry, but I have zero sympathy for criminals like this.

[edit on 1/15/2009 by greeneyedleo]

Originally posted by Saf85
What my issue is related to is; How do you know what he was? He could have been a mass murderer/rapeist/combination scum, he could have been a first time offender in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time.

The fact that he put a loaded gun in someone's face demanding money that wasn't his speaks volumes as to what he was. It doesn't matter if he was a first time offender or a three time loser, he was in the act of committing a crime with a deadly weapon.

The fact of the matter is, he attempted to rob, he did not show any sign of attempting to kill (for all we know his gun was imitation, unloaded, safety on and not cocked, even filled with blanks, no one has the answers to these but the police, so pls don't jump to conclusions), he did not kill anyone.

Thankfully he wasn't given the chance to kill anyone, had this man been unarmed the results may have been quite different. Whether the gun was fake, loaded with blanks, etc. is irrelevant. It's the intent that matters.

For all you who are religious, you will agree on an eye for an eye. In this case it was not an eye for an eye, since he killed no one, but wound up dead.

He ended up dead because his intended victim happened to be a little quicker on the draw.

My main point is, people who shoot to kill in defence, are playing God and passing judgement on those they kill. Why? because they fell they have some right to take a life, because they posess an weapon capable of doing so.

No, they shoot to kill because the law allows you to use lethal force when your life is threatened. Nobody but a fool would wait till someone actually shot them or a loved one before they reacted.

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat. The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

When you become a victim of a violent crime, I hope for your sake that your simply playing the Devil's advocate here, and don't take your own advice.

Originally posted by Saf85

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat.

Spoken like a true cave-dweller ignorant of reality.

The abdomen is pretty much where you're trained to shoot. Center mass. Center mass until there is no more threat or no more center mass. Whichever comes first.

I remember when I said relative to the Cho VA Tech thing that if students were permitted the right to defend themselves Cho would not have been so successful. I was countered with morons rambling about how difficult it was to hit a target. A target in a classroom couldnt be more than 12 feet away. Factor arm length and he's 7 feet away. I was told I suffered from delusions of super powered accuracy and I should dtop playing video games.

I know blind people who can consistently hit center mass 20' away on muscle memory alone. Unless actively suffering a heart attack or stroke there is no way in hell anybody is missing a target less than 10' away.

Either reality escapes these people or they surround themselves with the mentally and physically deficient while I simultaneously exhibit super-human accuracy.

I will wow you and steal your woman with my mad 10' bullseye trick shooting skills.

Originally posted by Sonya610
This story is all over the local news. Thought with all the frequent gun bashing threads this is a nice change. I am familiar with that area of town, it is undergoing gentrification, yuppy bars and the hood mixed together. Beautiful old houses but a tense atmosphere.

Does appear the citizen went to town once he started firing, six shots at close range? Though I suppose perhaps he just kept shooting until the assailant was down.

No charges are expected.

www.myfoxatlanta.com...

[edit on 15-1-2009 by Sonya610]

When shooting at someone, you don't stop and give them a chance to fire back .. you unload your clip and hope every bullet found it's mark.

Glad to see a citizen defending him self and his loved one.. whats to say after taking his money he would have shot the guy in the car and raped his wife and stole the car? Justice was served.

Originally posted by Saf85
What my issue is related to is; How do you know what he was? He could have been a mass murderer/rapeist/combination scum, he could have been a first time offender in the wrong neighbourhood at the wrong time.

Or he could have been the guy that robbed and killed the bartender on that same street just one week ago.

The fact of the matter is, he attempted to rob, he did not show any sign of attempting to kill (for all we know his gun was imitation, unloaded, safety on and not cocked, even filled with blanks, no one has the answers to these but the police, so pls don't jump to conclusions),

The fact that he had a REAL gun and pulled it on the guy and his girlfriend shows his intent.

he did not kill anyone.

Thank God for that!

In this case it was not an eye for an eye, since he killed no one, but wound up dead.

I call it survival of the fittest...

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat.

Which is exactly what he did...

The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

What would you have done? Excuuuuussseee me Mr. Robber, can I first ask you if you intend to kill me so I can use my gun?? My God, I hope you never come up against any situation like this, you will definately be a statistic. I guess you are another example of "survival of the fittest"!

Originally posted by RockpuckWhen shooting at someone, you don't stop and give them a chance to fire back .. you unload your clip and hope every bullet found it's mark.

I would feel a bit uneasy unloading completely, especially in that area. I am not suggesting there was excessive force, there is no such thing as excessive force in a situation like that.

I just wonder what he was thinking at the time. Was it panic? Was it just keep shooting until the assailant went down? He could have had a lot more than 6 shots to begin with.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by Sonya610]

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth
Quick, gun nuts, tell us how it's okay to take human life! Justify away, sharpish!

You're damned right it's okay, if you're defending your own!

On another point, it's refreshing to see so many posting in favor of the victim for defending himself. I'd love to get a license and carry a piece for self defense, but with a 2 year old the wife would never allow it and I would never forgive myself if an accident did ever occur.

I'm pretty nonviolent unless you attack me. Throughout my life I've tried to avoid fighting and violence, but there have always been bozos who think that fighting and intimidating others is fun. A lot of these same bozos don't like to work and feel that whatever you can't defend is theirs.

I've always given fair warning to such when I could: I don't fight for fun, I only fight when my life, or the lives of others, are in danger. And in that case I will kill you in the quickest and most efficient way I can. I don't fight for fun, and I don't tolerate attempts at intimidation for financial gain. Then I open myself and show them my spirit: most have looked into my eyes and found something better to do.

This is breaking news? Happens all the time in Texas.

Another one bites the dust. One less criminal for the rest of us to deal with. If he wanted due process, he shouldn't have pulled a gun and threatened the lives of others.

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth
Quick, gun nuts, tell us how it's okay to take human life! Justify away, sharpish!

Quick, "gunophobes", tell us what the intent of the robber with his gun was and why we shouldn't be allowed to protect ourselves.

Tell you what, God forbid you ever end up in the same situation. But if you do, please feel free to allow yourself to become a victim. It least it will cut down by one the number of "gunophobes" we have telling us that we must be victims, too.



[edit on 1/15/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Sonya610

Originally posted by RockpuckWhen shooting at someone, you don't stop and give them a chance to fire back .. you unload your clip and hope every bullet found it's mark.

I would feel a bit uneasy unloading completely, especially in that area. I am not suggesting there was excessive force, there is no such thing as excessive force in a situation like that.

I just wonder what he was thinking at the time. Was it panic? Was it just keep shooting until the assailant went down? He could have had a lot more than 6 shots to begin with.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by Sonya610]

If you ever received any hand gun training - and you should if you own a gun. You will be trained to keep shooting until the attack stops. That's all there is to it.

Originally posted by Saf85

You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat. The mentality of shooting first and asking questions later is just an excuse to kill. Also all those trigger happy folk, what if your shot exit wonds the person and travels on to harm or kill an innocent bystander? What if one of your shots is wide due to your hands shakeing with adrenaline etc? Your risking other innocent peoples lives in your selfrightious defence.

I'll weigh in on this one, too.

First, I challenge you to go to a gun range and rent a gun (because we can tell you don't own one) - and with no one threatening you - consistently hit a moving arm or leg sized target. Second, I want you to explain to all of us how shooting a person in the arm or leg stops the assailant from still shooting you and others. And while you're explaining the above, also explain how trying to hit smaller moving targets doesn't make you more likely to miss and therefore endanger other people.

Modern ammunition and training are the answers to your other statements.

Last, ask yourself this in answer to your questions. Which is more immediate and likely, your "what ifs", or the real fact that these people were actually being attacked by a person with a gun? You do read the news and know that many of these kinds of robberies also end up with the victims dead, right?

[edit on 1/15/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Saf85You can always shoot them in the arm/s, leg/s, abdomen and prevent them from posing any threat.

Did you read the OP Saf85? The guy was holding a GUN on them, in all likelihood at point blank range. The only way to prevent someone from shooting you is to disable them (i.e. kill them, or come darn close). Shooting them in the leg will NOT prevent them from pulling the trigger and shooting you back.

But if you think shooting the guy in the leg would worked (as he pointed a gun 2 feet from your head) then if you are ever in that situation, by all means, you shoot them in the leg. Good luck with that plan.

Honestly I have to wonder if your posts are even serious. I suspect you are trolling just to stir up a little controversy.

Good on this man, he protected himself and his girlfriend.

And he did us ALL a favor by eliminating one more scumbag from the face of the earth.

If a robber breaks into my house, to me that means he doesn't care who's on the other end and he or she will take what they want without regards of children being in the house. To me that means they are fair game and I'll shoot and reload as many times I want to make sure they are dead, gone, erased and forever on the pages of the Darwin awards list of people who wanted to die.