Trending now.....Two teenage boys shot dead in California during burglary attempt

a reply to: zatara

Bull. I knew what the consequences of breaking into someone's house at the "tender age" of 14 were. It's not rocket science. People cry that this is the 21st century and we should start handling things more peacefully. Right. That'll happen when the criminals end up following the same protocol. Won't happen. I for one, refuse to be victimized. Break into my house and be lucky if you leave unscathed. I aspire to be those tough old ladies mentioned earlier.

a reply to: intrepid

I have said this before, and I will likely as not have to say it again. When someone breaks into a home, the resident has no time, nor are they under any obligation to spend it if they do, to figure out what the intentions of the invader are. They only have a responsibility at that point, to defend their lives, assuming quite fairly given the circumstances, that they are in mortal danger.

Lets be clear, this is nothing to do with property. This is about defending ones life from the high probability of mortal threat acting upon it.

I would not suggest that someone shooting someone who is escaping with their television ought to aim for the back of a robbers head as they make off down the road, leaving the homeowner unmolested. But if someone is bang to rights wandering around my home in the dead of night, and they are not my mother, or a member of our household, you can damned well bet I will kill them without a second thought, and I will not be using a pistol since they are heavily regulated in my country. It will be a machete across the neck for them, and an end to it.

You cannot trust someone who is capable of breaking into a home they have no right to be in, not to be the sort of person who would also beat you to death in your sleep, or tie you up and leave you to starve, or rape your family members. You cannot assume that someone who is capable of invading the privacy and safety of your home, has non-violent intentions, because all too often, violent intentions come as part and parcel of the mentality which allows someone to consider breaking and entering as a career choice.

This woman was both within her rights legally,and ethically to take the lives she took, but in addition those kids FORCED this old woman do something that is horrible, no matter how justifiable. This is ALSO on them. Her trauma is more important than their rotting corpses, because she did not choose to cause the situation. She merely reacted to it, in a way that ANYONE ought to have. I say well done to the lady involved, and I hope all that can be done to help her overcome any post traumatic stress this incident may have imparted upon her.

I can agree that when the 2 boys broke into that home, they got what they were asking for, whether or not they knew they were asking for it. I also agree that finding a couple of strangers coming into your home should indeed make you feel that there's enough of a threat to your life to justify pulling a trigger.

BUT... there's an awful lot of supposition & assumptions going on here, being used as a basis for statements like, "I have no sympathy for them", & "they got what they deserved". These kids were 17 & 14 years old, young & stupid enough to think of the thrill, & not accept the possibility of their getting killed for what they were doing.

We're not talking about a couple of vicious predators here, unless you start in assuming what they would have done, or using other horror stories & applying them to this one. And yes, it is a horror story. Again, please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. I believe that in this life you must be damn sure what you're asking for, because when you're asking for nasty consequences, you'll often get them, whether or not you knew you were asking.
These 2 boys got what they were asking for, yes, but I'm not going to say they deserved it. IMO, this is a tragedy for all involved, one more of life's lessons learned at terrible cost.

originally posted by: zatara

Sorry, but yet again, I have no sorrow for the kids.....moral of the story is yet again, quit breaking in to houses and you'll live longer.

We are talking about teenage kids who are not fully aware of the consequences of their actions. At this age they are seeking challenges, suspence and their identity. I am not saying these kids did the right thing but they didn't deserve to die. If these were two grown men it would be a different story.

I did some stupid things at that age but turned out well. Hell, I work for the justice department. I bet my mother and rest of the family is happy I wasn't shot dead at 14...These boys will never have the chance to learn and become a good person.

I worked with Juvenile offenders for 18 months at one of my many jobs (I was a military wife, we moved a lot). Anyway, these "kids" are quite capable of killing, beating, raping. As a matter of fact because their brains are not yet mature and because of the high concentration of testosterone that occurs naturally in teen boys, they can be far more deadly than grown men. They are also more likely to be high on drugs than grown men.

I certainly don't blame an elderly person for not waiting around to see if these "kids" will be good persons or not. The danger to oneself is just too high to take a chance.

Sorry, the kids knew better. The elderly woman also knew her chances of being assaulted or killed were high, so she and her relatives had every right to defend themselves.

In the case where the guy was convicted....his behavior was reprehensible.

That said, I would fully support a law in which people who kill burglars cannot stand trial for that act. If you want to be tough on crime, do it by empowering the people, not the prosecutory machine.

originally posted by: BuzzCory

We're not talking about a couple of vicious predators here

Yeah, they were probably some of the most cuddly and lovable burglars you'd ever get invaded by.

I am really just tired of all the bleeding hearts on the other side of the story complaining about how robbers don't deserve death. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I'm tired of guns being the (false) answer to everything. The US is a case study for irreversible cultural decay and many of the world's citizens realize that. Cavalier attitudes toward human life is the common thread.

Burglars don't deserve death. Burglars risk injury or death because their right to safety is subordinated to safety of the legal resident of the dwelling. They are two very different things morally and legally.

a reply to: BuzzCory

Even more presumptive is that a 14 and 17 year old cannot be a couple of predators.

I have met some that are like children. I have met some that have a thousand yard stare. Unless one of us knows the burglars, we are all speaking from conjecture. Even yourself.

And I still have no sympathy for them. From the first time they stole their classmates cookie in kindergarten, they have been taught that stealing is wrong. They knew better.

I have sympathy for anyone who knew them who tried to provide them better guidance than they seemed to have had. I was a "bad kid", and I would never have broken into someone's home. Especially an elderly lady. Which kind of drives home the point: predators target elderly ladies. The weakest in the herd.

a reply to: TrueBrit


I can't speak for intrepid but the way I see it is that there will always be tragedies for sure.
Someone old, someone terrified and then shoots, they may well kill someone, it happens.
My problem is those people saying "If you break in I will kill you" or "I catch you outside trying to get in, I'll blow your head off"
because I think then people just seem to want to kill.
What happened to Shoot to maim?

Of course you're taking a risk but most youngsters and crooks who burgle are not going to kill, they're hoping nobody is home or if they are home, that they don't wake up.
I agree that if you decide to do this and invade homes, then you run the risk of bad stuff happening to you, but much like the death penalty debate, it gets far too highly emotional.

If you catch someone breaking in and they wont stop or they threaten you then shoot their legs, arms, shoulder, feet... there are many ways to stop someone, don't have to kill them.

I'm the same as you in that I don't have access to guns as 99.9% of the UK doesn't have them or want them, but if I caught someone breaking in I have several other weapons with which to protect myself.
I would baseball bat them or knife them or whatever..... but I would not keep hitting or knifing until they were dead.


It is a difficult argument because I can see both sides for sure, but what gets me (and others I'm sure) is the BS macho crap of "I would shoot them dead for sure, no screwing around" or "I would blow their heads off, you come near my property you deserve to die"

Really? Someone who steals your TV or wants your car deserves death, by your hand?

If death happened after a struggle or because the homeowner was threatened, then that is one thing.... and understandable, all the other BS is not.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: BuzzCory

We're not talking about a couple of vicious predators here

Yeah, they were probably some of the most cuddly and lovable burglars you'd ever get invaded by.

"Probably"... case in point.
And they were probably going to set fire to the entire block on their way out, so I guess it's a good thing after all that they were killed. I know many of you will focus on the absurdity of what I just said, & not see the point I'm making, so fire away (no pun intended).

I fully support the right of the people to defend their families and their property against thieves.

You just never know when those breaking in are high on crack and intend to kill you and your family, and I sure as hell won't politely ask a burglar if they're high.

I'll let my Mossberg 550 and some 00 Buckshot do the greeting for me

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

Burglars don't deserve death.

What do they deserve?
Do they deserve a free ticket to whatever they please until the police arrive? That is, IF the homeowner was able to call 911.

a reply to: blupblup

Shoot to maim disappeared when burglars were given the opportunity to sue those they victimized. I never want to have to kill someone. I would carry that for the rest of my life. But I also don't want to get dragged into a legal battle that would involve the possibility of me having to pay money to someone who was originally trying to steal from me.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass

I am really just tired of all the bleeding hearts on the other side of the story complaining about how robbers don't deserve death. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I'm tired of guns being the (false) answer to everything. The US is a case study for irreversible cultural decay and many of the world's citizens realize that. Cavalier attitudes toward human life is the common thread.

Burglars don't deserve death. Burglars risk injury or death because their right to safety is subordinated to safety of the legal resident of the dwelling. They are two very different things morally and legally.

If you feel that way, ok.

When a couple of teenage boys break into your house while you are home, help them pick and choose which items they "need" the most. That is your right.

You can also try and counsel them while they tie you up and possibly beat, kill or rape you. That is well within your rights.

You can certainly deal with thieves in your home as you wish.

But I don't think everyone is obligated to look at home invasion while someone is in the home as a time to think about the burglars rights. I think that if one chooses to defend the possibility of physical harm or death they have the right to think about their and their family's safety first.

Just as you can offer tea and crumpets to your burglars and try to understand them if you want to.

a reply to: HardCorps

I agree!

a reply to: blupblup

What happened to Shoot to maim?

Lawyers. That's what happened to 'shoot to maim.'

You shoot to maim the burglar.
Burglar get 3 months in the county slammer for burglary.
Burglar sues you for damages.

Burglar gets your house.

Yay! Shoot to maim. Lose your house.

Here is another story of a home invasion...with different results. The burglers were not shot. This is what can happen in every single instance of home invasions/burgluries. Nobody should have to go thru what these victims went thru.

murderpedia.org...

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: BuzzCory

Even more presumptive is that a 14 and 17 year old cannot be a couple of predators.

I have met some that are like children. I have met some that have a thousand yard stare. Unless one of us knows the burglars, we are all speaking from conjecture. Even yourself.

And I still have no sympathy for them. From the first time they stole their classmates cookie in kindergarten, they have been taught that stealing is wrong. They knew better.

I have sympathy for anyone who knew them who tried to provide them better guidance than they seemed to have had. I was a "bad kid", and I would never have broken into someone's home. Especially an elderly lady. Which kind of drives home the point: predators target elderly ladies. The weakest in the herd.

I'm aware that I was speaking from conjecture. My point (which I don't think I made clear enough originally) was that the original article linked to in the OP gave no information about the 2 boys other than their ages, no history of predation, nothing. Everyone here who is celebrating their deaths is doing so because of what they are "sure" would have happened, or what they are assuming could have been true about these 2.

Strange that what seems to be getting some people's hackles up is the fact that while I will say they got what they were asking for, I won't say they got what they deserved.

a reply to: intrepid

So the people in the home should have just let their home be burglarized ... and they should have just assumed that the intruders were going to let the home dwellers go about their day without any harm?

*shakes head* Pffft ... Canada ....

a reply to: Britster1821

thats the real crux of the issue 30 years ago burglers werent suing the people whos house they broke into,now adays sadly its if you shoot them hope to god you kill them so you dont get sued into oblivion sad but true reality we face in today's times