Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
reply to post by mee30
Take a position of advantage, around a corner for example, fire a warning shot and tell them to get out, call the cops if possible before the
Killing an intruder should be the absolute LAST resort, it wasn't in this case.
This is the silliest advice I have ever heard.
First of all, your alone, in the dark and your old. You have no idea what you are up against all you know is people have entered your home.
Firing a warning shot is the dumbest thing you could do.
You do not fire a weapon with the intent to disable people. You do not fire a weapon in the hope to scare someone else off. You fire a weapon with the
intent to hit your target and kill it. That's it. Any other intention and your doing it wrong.
Let us say he fires a "warning shot" and the people entering his home happen to be armed as well. Then the old man just gave up any element of
surprise and any advantage that he had.
I understand the point you are attempting to make, but this is the wrong way to make it. This idea of "shooting a warning shot" or "shooting in the
shoulder" and all these other silly ideas I have seen in this thread is how gun owners get themselves killed when they could have saved their own
life. Rules are pretty simple for gun owners.
1. You never pull out your weapon unless you intend to use it.
2. You shoot to kill.
Anything else can get you killed. Anti Gun people love to echo the statistic that many gun owners are killed by their own weapon and it is true.
However, it is true because those gun owners failed to follow the 2 simple rules I outlined above.
Now that being said, in regards to this case there are some things I am reading here that make no sense at all. With that in mind, dead people tell no
tales so these details have to be coming from the only other person in the room at the time of this shooting, and that is the shooter.
For starters, he claims he shot the young man as he entered the home. The young man falls down the stairs and he then shoot him again in the face.
Then the girl comes into the home?
Think about that a minute.
Your the girl, you know you and your cousin are unarmed. You hear 2 shots go off after your cousin enters a home that he has no business being in,..
and you then go in? That makes no sense.
Second issue I have.. Girl enters the home. He shoots her and she falls down the steps as well. He goes to fire another shot at her and his gun jams
and she laughs at him? Makes no sense. You are lying on the ground after being shot. Your not laughing. Even if the gun jams, I can not imagine that
anyone would laugh at that point at the guy who just fired 3 shots hitting you one time and killing your cousin. It might make some sense if she had
no idea she was shot, but she just fell down a flight of stairs. I am pretty sure she knew she had been shot. So again, makes no sense and if it does
not make sense, it probably is not true, but this story is what the shooter is telling. So why is he lying?
In any event, after shooting the girl and her supposedly laughing at him after the gun jams, he admits he pulled a revolver and shot her in the chest
multiple times. Well guess what? At this moment he is no longer defending himself or his property. He is committing murder. However, he didn't stop
there. After all that he still walked up on his victim, put the gun under her chin and fired one more shot into her head.
That description is not self defense. Self defense is very clear in that you use as much force to eliminate the threat. If someone punches you in the
face, you have a right to defend yourself. If you knock that person out cold, and you continue to beat on them, you are no longer defending yourself.
You have, in that moment, become the aggressor.
So what this man has described is not self defense at all. It is murder. However, I have to seriously question the story he is telling.
on 27-11-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)