Outrage after popular students are found murdered in man's basement after 'they robbed his home on

reply to post by ISeekTruth101


What kind of deluded butterflies and rainbows reality do you live in? Human wisdom says you don't fire warning shots.
You're responsible for every projectile that leaves your weapon and for whatever it may hit. Bullets don't magically stop after they've warned your intruder. The stoner kid across the street microwaving a hot pocket or the grandma watching wheel of fortune or the toddler playing with their elmo doll, just became a causality of your kindness. Fact is if you don't know where that projectile is going to land, you don't shoot and that includes warning shots.
This "kill them with kindness" pandering to criminals is a huge part of the problem. Don't be a victim or a statistic, learn to protect yourself and don't feel pity for those that intentionally choose to do wrong.

The real question is should he have walked up to the person that was already shot, put the gun in their mouth and pulled the trigger.

I think that he was well within his rights to shot them, but not within his rights to execute them once he had shot them.

If someone breaks into your house, and you shot them that's the risk they take. It's also not uncommon for people in that situation (fearing for their life) to empty their gun into a bugler. Once again, that to me is well within their rights.

BUT, after the burglars have been shot, unless they are pulling out their own gun, your next course of action would be to call 911. He didn't do that. He consulted with neighbors about getting a good lawyer. He didn't notify the police until days later.

After reading the article and then reading the comments - wow! Charged conversation here.

The man's statements are hinkier than can be. His story doesn't add up to me.

I would like to see the full police complaint before making any judgements.

With that being said, I fully support anyone protecting their family/home/property even with lethal force.

I would never want to harm another soul but if it's me or an intruder or an intruder vs my family. The intruder will be shot, no questions asked.

If you are in my home, without me knowing, I'm going to shoot you until I no longer feel you are a threat. I'm not going to ask you to freeze so you have time to run into another room and possibly draw a weapon. I'm going to shoot you, most likely, 3 or 4 times.

I use a 1911 ( for home defense ) and use hollow points. If I hit you center mass, chest, neck, or head you ain't going to make it. One round is overkill.

America is going to be such a fun place to live if society ever does collapse Gangs and highly paranoid people with a "I'm the best and always correct" attitude.....going to be a bloodbath.

reply to post by milominderbinder

This is all based off of the article, so if they did not break into the house, then how did either teenager get down to where the person was sitting in the first place?

And based off of the suspect statement, that while sitting there, in his chair, in the basement of his house, the girl walked down, and his gun jammed, and then the girl laughed at him. He pulled out another weapon and shot her.

So the question is if the teens were not in his house, when how did they get there? After all if one is going to move a body with a hole in it, there would be blood coming out from the wound. As the article does not show this to be the case, we can conclude that the teens were in the house in the first place where they were shot and executed.

While I do agree that the deaths were sensless, neither of the teens were angles, infact they did have a drug problem. And if they were indeed breaking into houses to steal and rob from people, then that would be a good reason for such.

But beyond that, tell me if you are in a house and hear a gun shot, do you go towards or away from the sound? One, being reasonable, would run away from the sound, as it would be a means of self preservation, not go down and investigate, which is what it sounds like she did. And if she was outside, then what was she doing on the property, all of the pictures of the house where this took place, pretty much shows that the house it not set next to anyone elses house, more like one has to walk down to where it is.
As I stated, there are too many questions and it is now in the hands of the courts and investigators to determine what did happen and present it before 2 lawyers. Following the laws of the country, this guy in short shot and killed 2 teens who broke into his house. The question that many are raised is how far should that force have gone, and based off of his statements, he executed them, in the basement of his house.

Everyone is overlooking the fact that

He didn't call the Police!

He knew what he did was wrong and asked the neighbor about a lawyer. The neighbor called the police about the man's suspicious behavior.

I am all for protecting your family and property with lethal force if needed, but this man went way overboard and he knew it.

Who's to say that he ever would have notified authorities? Then we would have been looking at just another missing person's case.

~OkieDokie

There is a huge difference between defending your life and property with deadly force, and capturing and then executing in cold blood.

Executing someone in cold blood is always a heinous murder even when the victim is a criminal themselves.

Whats the point of the law, courts, juries, judges, prison anyway right?

This guy is full of it! Who gets shot and then laughs when someone is trying to finish you off...never mind the fact you just witnessed your partner in crime fall down a flight of stairs after being shot...something does not add up. I think he caught them outside his property and made them come in and when they couldn't answer questions as to who broke into his house previously, he decided it was them and shot them dead...repeatedly! I hope these kids didn't have any friends with loose screws...seems this guys family could be a target going forward.

Only in America.

Good comparison is this, the rules of war.

Self defense is always legal, but rounding them up and shooting them in the head is a war crime.

I am a extreme firm believer in protecting my home at all cost but if you actually read the whole story this guy went out of his way to kill these teens. There was never a moment that this jackwagon was ever in any danger and he killed them because he the law says he could.

He messed up by shooting to many times and also by telling the police about his finishing shot.

THIS MAN DESERVES TO GO TO JAIL FOR HIS ACTIONS!!!!!

He killed two harmles human beings for making a mistake and breaking into his home.
He used past break ins to justify his shoot first think later.

reply to post by milominderbinder


Heres the problem, they broke into his house, they don't know his mental state or if he's crazy, He didn't go into their home and shoot them did he? End of story don't brake into someones home because you don't know who they are and what they are capable of. Did he go to far? yeah you could say that, but he wouldn't have had the opportunity if they stayed out of his house.

Has anyone considered the fact that this entire story could be one of those fake news items. All the people are portraying a part and the next thing you know - there will be a proposed ban on privately owned guns.

Just a suggestion - it would not be the first time this type of news article has been constructed with an ulterior motive.

I thought of this because posters are thinking through the available information and pulling it apart by applying natural psychology. Anyone know the victims personally and will be attending the funeral???

Much Peace...

Originally posted by milominderbinder

apparently the police agreed, i'm sure they investigated the claim. and there is no mention that police found evidence contrary of his statement. fact is that police seem to back his story.

That's not apparent at all. The police haven't commented on it as of yet. Likewise, there is NOTHING in the article that indicates the police agree with anything that it says whatsoever.
Good job on the critical thinking and reading skills.
from the article

She added that her cousin, who had undergone treatment for substance abuse, could have been after pills from the home.
see that above, i bet you anything that was what these two were after, they were junkies looking to steel pill or stuff to get money for more.

Perhaps. It's certainly a possibility. But should we REALLY be this quick to take it all at face value? If they were "after pills" that would seem to indicate that the homeowner was ALSO a "junkie" on pills. How do we know that he wasn't mixing his pills and booze on Thanksgiving and that caused him to shoot the two nice kids who knocked on his door to ask directions? If this guy had Brett Favre's body stuffed underneath the basement steps would we just take this guys word at face value? No toxicology report has been issued yet....how do you know that the creepy old guy didn't drug them both with roofies and then shot them when they came to and tried to escape? Has anybody checked their internet activity? What if these kids responded to a "for sale" posting on craigslist and already had a meeting arranged at the specific time they allegedly "broke into the house?"

Does the old man's story even seem PLAUSIBLE?? I personally find it mighty hard to believe that an 18 yr old girl with a dead cousin and one bullet in her already was laughing at this clown. Doesn't that statement alone make you take pause and "wait a second...what?!?"

It should.

Originally posted by milominderbinder
That's not apparent at all. The police haven't commented on it as of yet. Likewise, there is NOTHING in the article that indicates the police agree with anything that it says whatsoever.

on the contrary, see this from the article

'A person has every right to defend themselves and their homes, even employing deadly force if necessary,' Morrison County Sheriff Michel Wetzel said. 'Circumstances of this case however, led deputies to believe that Smith went beyond that point.'

maybe i'm not reading enough into to the sheriffs statement. what stands out to me is,
'Circumstances of this case however, led deputies to believe that Smith went beyond that point.'

what this says to me is that a investigation was done and the deputies, found enough cause to charge him with second degree murder, there is nothing that states anything to the contrary. in fact if you look carefullyt at the sheriffs statement, it would seem to indicate that, they believe him.

see first part of his statement.
'A person has every right to defend themselves and their homes, even employing deadly force if necessary,'

Originally posted by milominderbinde
Good job on the critical thinking and reading skills.

i think maybe you might need to bone up on your skills.
examples

Originally posted by milominderbinder
If they were "after pills" that would seem to indicate that the homeowner was ALSO a "junkie" on pills

come on he was a old man that more than likly has a but load of prescription medications.
and junkie thief's know old folks get all kinds of scripts for pain and other conditions.
where are them skills you are talking about.

Originally posted by milominderbinder
How do we know that he wasn't mixing his pills and booze on Thanksgiving and that caused him to shoot the two nice kids who knocked on his door to ask directions?

because of the statement released by the sheriff. again brush up on those skills
and as far as the you using bret frave or any other publicly know person, it don't hold water.
and just in case you didn't see my edit to my first response to you
your words are in the bold.below

ETA: this from your one of your posts i don't know who you are responding to.
There are simply no commonly found street drugs that would produce this sort of behavior. Moreover, this is the about the fourth time I've heard somebody offhandedly state "well...they must have been on drugs" excuse.

The article states that one of them had a little problem with prescription meds

...but so did Brett Farve and Rush Limbaugh.
you know much about street drugs do ya, i don't think so. also brett frave and rush limbaugh weren't found dead in someones home after a apparent break in. edit on 27-11-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

here is some more

edit on 27-11-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

Just like the "innocent" Trayvon Martin. Look, it's simple. Don't want to be shot? Don't rob people. Even an idiot can understand that. These criminals got what they deserved. I'd laugh in the face of those who claim otherwise.

Originally posted by ganjoa
Considering the man's responses to the police, he should be charged with first degree murder instead of second degree, but well then he WAS defending his property. Generally I am the one jumping up and down defending gun rights and protecting the home against invasion, but this guy is way over the top with the multiple gunshot wounds and getting the good clean kill shot from under the girl's chin into her brain after shooting her with two different guns after the first one jammed. That is way beyond self defense, even here in Texas.

ganjoa

Just my legally uneducated observation, but I don't think you can be charged with 1st degree murder without premeditation, which was obviously not present in this case.

The defender should have some forethought of his actions and ,if possible, choose the degree and method of force to diffuse or end a potentially dangerous situation, but, without training this is seldom the outcome.

Such encounters with untrained individuals are driven by adrenaline and instinct and are more animalistic in nature and similarly you would not expect an animal defending their den or young to "show restraint", neither would I expect that from breaking into the home of an elderly person with possible dementia or under the influence of medication or depression. Such individuals have limited physical options of defending themselves and naturally rely on force multipliers which may seem, from the sound mind and body of the observer, to be overkill.

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
The bloodlust of some people in this thread is disgusting.

What is it that Stalin said?

Many people, many problems.
Get rid of the people, get rid of the problem.

Yeah its pretty sick and psychopathic sounding, but its more popular in minds globally than we can even imagine.

I am not saying there should not be a full investigation to answer all the questions about this but taking everything at face value the only problem I see here is the guy talked to police. He should have kept his mouth shut. He is a former Department of State security agent. In other words he was expected to be able to coldly execute potential attackers. He didnt hide the bodies in the basement. According to his account they came to the basement where he was at and he shot them. He didnt call 911 imediately which is not at all a problem. After shooting someone your going to be compeltely amped up on adrenaline. You dont want that 911 call recorded and played back at trial because there is no telling what you will say on that call. For example, if you are attacked and you shoot the attacker if you call 911 and say "I got attacked and shot a guy" thats fine but if you say "I fought with a guy and shot him" your potentially in trouble. Same thing happened but in the heat of the moment words make it sound like something different. In this situation his statements may be way more damning than what actually occured
He should have kept his mouth shut and let his lawyer do his talking. Once he shot them he should have had his neighbor call 911 and he call his lawyer.
As far as "shooting too much" there is no such thing.
You shoot until the attacker stops functioning. Ask any cop how they are trained its not to just shoot a couple of shots till the bad guy says "owie".
Also I hate to burst the bubble around this "innocent little girl" but keep in mind when Bonnie Parker met Clyde Barrow she was a teenage girl and they proceeded to go on a multi state killing spree.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
reply to post by Annee

 

Well, this crime wouldn't be punishable by death in AZ..

And I view the mindset of death for anyone who trespasses to be disproportionate.

Protip: be VERY selective of whose home you choose to invade then. Not everyone is as timid as you would hope. Annee and I have our differences around here, but I've got her back on this one.