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.

 

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

page: 13
56
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by Rubic0n
 

We're all responding to the same story or what little has been made public.

It doesn't change the fact that the only thing we have is the homeowner's story and therefore incomplete information.



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


Yes and? You would have been much better off responding to who i responded in the first place. You are doubting my response to his stance, to what end? , the whole thing could have been hypothetical for all i care and it still would not have changed a single thing to my response in his P.O.V.


You would have done much better posting what you did not in response to anyone or just the op.
We are discussing the info that is for thus far available , if you do not like that then report the thread to a moderator and ask for it to be closed or something...




posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Rubic0n
 


You did a step by step of the situation based on the information in the article. Replying to your post is the same as replying to the OP.


It is really simple. They both broke into his house knowing full well about the dangers of being shot for it and with that they forced that man into the position he was in, nothing more nothing less.

This is you assuming that the guy is telling the truth, nothing more nothing less.

ETA: My original reply stated that everyone is forming opinions based on incomplete information, so it was a general comment on the thread with your post being one example.
edit on 27-11-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ISeekTruth101
Actually what kind of sadistic world do you live in?????

They were practically KIDS, not some crackhead who benches 200 lbs !!!, they posed NO immediate danger, Read The OP again!


Depending on the State law... In my State for example, a person unlawfully in your home is considered and presumed to be a threat. No assessment on part of the resident is required. You have full immunity from prosecution and from civil liability for shooting and killing any intruder without regard to their age, size or if they were armed with a firearm, knife or not at all...


Originally posted by ISeekTruth101
They did NOT deserve to die in such cruel fashion and it could have been avoided if the 64 year old actually gave a warning shot!


This has been covered here in the thread ad nauseum. Warning shots are not only not required they are counter intuitive and not effective in any good threat confrontation scenario.


Originally posted by ISeekTruth101
Even a swat team that is armed to the bone, that approaches a hostile 200lb man with an AK47 will request that he drops the weapon first and put his hands up in the air.......they wont shoot first like its a video game???


No, no they won't. They will not get within the weapon's effective range and risk death to make such a request. If you can provide one SWAT SOP or standard practice that outlines your suggested course of action I will eat my hat. They will not make such a demand. They will shoot him and then approach. They will scream those things, drop your weapon and such but will also fire at the same time. No one will fault them either.



edit on 27/11/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
As a woman, anyone breaking and entering my home will be subject to capital punishment if I am able and not killed by whomever breaks in my home. In addition, if the person or people were able to escape I would never feel safe in my home again. No repeat offenders means safety. Our society is too lenient on so called children. Once you know right and wrong and you choose to commit wrong, then punishment should ensue.I do not care if it is excessive as the person chose to commit a crime. IMO as a society we are paying the price for 40 years of liberalism.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   


He should have just called the police; fired a warning shot into the ceiling


Firing a warning shot into the ceiling is probably not a good idea...



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
IMO: It's a risk you take when you rob someone house. If your grown enough to know how to do the crime, you should be grown enough to know the consequences (jail if your lucky or death). It's a matter of time before you walk up in the wrong house! Bottom line.

My point of view and brief examples.
1. A few years ago around Christmas a families house was robbed by teenagers, they tied them up with Christmas lights from the tree and held a gun to the 5 year old child's head while one teen took the mother to a ATM machine. (which is how they were caught) They made the 5 year old get his piggy bank and smashed it open in front of him, they took all their Christmas presents. This family was brutalized, beaten (for hours) and their children will most likely never be the same. Ironically, a few months later one of the teens involved had his house burned to the ground, his mother wasn't happy, no charges were made.
2. Another man was shot in the back of the head while trying to flee from robbers that invaded his home. He died.
3. About 2 weeks ago a bloody woman was running down the street screaming for help, she had been shot and her husband was dead in a pool of blood, their house had just been robbed and the couple had no weapons.
4. Last summer: A woman was robbed, raped and beat so bad they thought she was dead, they put her body in a kitchen closet and left her. However she was unconscious. She came to and ran nude to a neighbors house, the police said they had never seen so much blood.

My list can go on longer than this post will allow, my point is when will enough be enough??? Who is there to protect women, families and their children during a robbery (you can't always pick up the phone and call police) You have to do what you have to do in order to survive, you don't know the robbers intent, how far will he/she go, it's all unknown. All you know is he/she is standing in your home! You have a split second to decide what you will do.
*Please note this post is based on what I have read here, I don't know the full back story. But what I do know is one bullet can kill you just like several can, if anything he should be charged with abuse of a corpse.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   

edit on 27-11-2012 by LittleByLittle because: Bah. Who cares. Wont know what happened for a long time anyway.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
having now read more of this story and learned more details, i say the shooter went way beyond what was necessary. two times he had disabled an intruder with a shot, and twice he decided this was not enough, and he executed them. not right.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


- I could'nt care less about you're state laws? since when where they perfect? common sense is all you need in that situation, so dont give me that BS speech, they WERE kids, unarmed and posed no serious threat.

- secondly why the HELL would a swat team ask a hostile to drop the weapon and shoot at the same time, its drop or we will open fire, so you can eat your hat because if i start looking for videos where that has happened im sure there are plenty,

- PLEASE tell me you read the OP word by word? what is your assessment of this PARTICULAR scenario? if it was a different scenario then fine, but we both know a warning shot was needed.

- Why are there so many trigger happy fanatics in this thread? JUDGE THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO please and you will find the old man was in the wrong to brutally shoot them in such a manner.

If this was in a court of law, the judge would tear you into pieces.....killing those kids than hiding the body doesnt help the 'self defence' motive AT ALL.

Argh!!!! some people wind me up.
edit on 27-11-2012 by ISeekTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

"Warning shots"? Do you realize how dangerous "warning shots" are? This is why people are no longer trained to fire "warning shots" - they are actually trained NOT to nowadays. That bullet has to go somewhere, and innocent people quite a distance away can be and have been killed or injured by "warning shots" when they were doing nothing wrong.

Besides, a "warning shot" is a far more credible warning when it drops the offender in his tracks.


Yes. If you choose to have a gun in your home for protection - - you better have training - - and expect to use it. There is nothing more dangerous then an untrained gun owner.

In Arizona with its open gun laws - - - you EXPECT the other guy to be armed. You do not question whether he has a gun or not - - you expect it.

You do not play guessing games.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
i take it in america, any idiot can buy a gun without training and brutallygun down two unarmed kids who made the mistake of trespassing onto there property!.

How humane!!! ****common sense, they made a mistake lets shoot them more times than we can count.

Wth!!!



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoScoLaz
having now read more of this story and learned more details, i say the shooter went way beyond what was necessary. two times he had disabled an intruder with a shot, and twice he decided this was not enough, and he executed them. not right.


You take what you get when you break into another Man's home. Necessary force in exactly what you deem it to be on your own property. This dude may have went overboard but he also had no idea as to there intentions. If you dance with the Devil sometimes you get burned.
edit on 27-11-2012 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I still don’t get why anyone would laugh at the person holding a gun at them jammed or not?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
It seems fair judgement that he went beyond the realm of justifiable self defence into the realm of murder.

He probably realised pretty quickly once his rage subsided, thats why he hid the bodies. You don't end up with cadavers in your basement if you think your actions are defensible.

Shooting intruders to protect yourself I can support. (If they get incapacitated and die from their wounds while the emergency services arrive then thats the chance they take). Its a bad situation but you are still the victim at that point.

Shooting them to the point of incapacity and then deciding rather than calling the cops you'll walk up and blow their brains out while they are helpless, that makes you a murderer. They are a corpse and you are now the criminal.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
"Hi, we broke into your home and have plans to rob you but we don't want to cause you any harm. So there is no reason to shoot us."

Give me a break. If you don't want to get shot then don't break into someone's house. It's simple.

He who seeks to deprive the rights of another human being has in turn forfeited his own rights.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Here watch this video


And listen CAREFULLY to how the swat team conduct themselves with regards to a family inside this building, WHILST under HEAVY fire !!!!!!!!!

And were talking about TWO unarmed kids.

''they PERSUADE the gunmen to surrender''

Listen to the end please!!!

Deny ignorance, go eat you're hat now please.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy06shake

You take what you get when you break into another Man's home. Necessary force in exactly what you deem it to be on your own property. This dude may have went overboard but he also had no idea as to there intentions. If you dance with the Devil sometimes you get burned.


Absolutely!

When I was a teenager near the Hollywood Hills - - - one of the stupid things teenagers did was sneak on to the grounds of some of the huge mansions. I did that once with a group of friends. One girl could not keep her mouth shut. Whistles and sirens went off - - and they released the dogs. We did escape - but it was STUPID. We invaded someone's private property.

If I'd gotten shot - - - I would have deserved it. It was my fault. I knew I was trespassing. Being a teenager is not an excuse.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
If someone is brazen enough to break into my house, my AR will do the talking. Violating the sanctity of a person's home is serious business. It's a huge spit in the face when you come home to see your place trashed, belongings missing. It makes you feel like you are not even safe in your own home, it's a horrible feeling.

Someone breaks into my home, I am going to assume they are armed and dangerous, and treat them like it. Shoot first, then call the cops to come take out the garbage.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
As the Oklahoma Pharmacy owner learned the hard way after putting 1 extra shot into a body on the floor for a camera to see...the line between defense and murder is NOT that fine a line at all. It's a pretty BIG one and this guy is a murderer if the story can be taken at face value and going by the OP details on this.

Heck, I was really looking for ways to find an excuse for the guy too. I always do on citizen defense shootings. I happen to lean that way by nature, so I try. However, when I got to the part about finding the bodies a DAY LATER and how cops had to COME TO HIM....not be called BY him..well, whatever it started as for a self defense shooting, it sure as hell didn't END that way and I wonder just how much 'joy' this sick man took in insuring the two boys were good and dead.


I'll be the FIRST to shoot someone and I don't care WHO they are...if they break into my home and I come upon them. I assume, by hard experience growing up around criminals, that to have broken into a Residential building they have already thought through finding a homeowner and decided what to DO with any possible homeowner they'd surprise. That can't be GOOD for my future...and so yeah, I'll shoot the instant I confirm they ARE strangers, they ARE a threat and there is no mistaken ID possible here.

^^ By that same token.....If I shoot an intruder and it doesn't kill them but DOES 100% end their status as a threat to me .....I WILL NOT pump another couple rounds into them and finish it. Good God... We call ourselves Men while fighting a criminal threat THEN go on to BECOME worse in the moment than the threat ever was. How can a man like this or that pharmacy owner in Oklahoma LIVE with themselves knowing a shooting may have to have happened......but the damage done to the friends, family and of course the person themselves DID NOT necessarily HAVE to happen. That, I couldn't well live with. I wish him well for it.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Everyone is looking at the Trespassing, Okay fine. Trespasser needed to be shot... Lets leave that alone.

Now why would he *someone who is defending his home, with perfect justification*after incapacitating them, he executed..close up from chin to the cranium...then and hide the bodies in basement?

*measly, "i didn't want to bother the cops during Thanksgiving" is not acceptable.

Because everyone is dodging those questions and jumping back to gun law and private property, which i think is derailing the thread a bit from the story.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join