Uh oh....standing his ground...

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by outbackjack, Jul 27, 2013.

  1. whitelakegator
    Offline

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +20
    Forget race. This has to do with taking the law into your own hands. You want to have the second amendment and then forget the rest of the Constitution?
  2. The_Graygator
    Offline

    The_Graygator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    36,265
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,022


    I agree with a lot of this, but myself, I would have probably waited to see if he'd have drawn a gun. If he was up right beside the house, I have no problem with the man shooting him. Approaching the house? I just don't know.

    If this kid has a distinct past of breaking the law, and especially if he has a past of stealing and break-ins, then the man was justified.

    I'm just saying that all the evidence and circumstances need to be looked at here, but it looks to me like this guy has an uphill battle on his hands, especially with all the Trayvon stuff that has gone on.
  3. WESGATORS
    Offline

    WESGATORS Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    21,551
    Likes Received:
    306
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,094
    Legally, this may be the case (I hope not), but morally, it's not. I can think of numerous examples where stealing "property" may be putting your life at greater risk or otherwise creating a burden that should not be expected to be peacefully tolerated.

    - stealing food after a major storm has left considerable damage
    - stealing clean water in the same scenario
    - stealing a vehicle (if you are in a rural area, that may be the fastest way to get someone to the ER), what if you had medically necessary equipment in the car?
    - stealing ammunition
    - stealing medicine

    You can't just draw a line in the sand and say "no killing over property" and I hope that the law doesn't actually do this. That would be ridiculous. Sometimes the property needs to be protected at all costs.

    If we can accept that there are certain instances where stealing is unacceptable, then we must logically imagine that getting to the point of identifying things that stealing may indeed be acceptable is a slope (however steep) and not a cliff.

    Go GATORS!
    ,WESGATORS
  4. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,481
    Likes Received:
    2,388
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,105
    "Two months into his stay in the United States, he received an invitation, along with Webb Haymaker, his homestay brother, to a Halloween party organized for Japanese exchange students on October 17, 1992. Hattori went dressed in a tuxedo in imitation of John Travolta from Saturday Night Fever. Upon their arrival in the quiet working-class neighborhood where the party was held, the boys mistook the Peairses' residence for their intended destination due to the similarity of the address and the Halloween decorations on the outside of the house, and proceeded to step out of their car and walk to the front door.[1]

    Hattori and Haymaker rang the front doorbell but, seemingly receiving no response, began to walk back to their car.
    Meanwhile, inside the house, their arrival had not gone unnoticed. Bonnie Peairs had peered out the side door and saw them. Mrs. Peairs, startled, retreated inside, locked the door, and said to her husband, "Rodney, get your gun." Hattori and Haymaker were walking to their car when the carport door was opened again, this time by Mr. Peairs. He was armed with a loaded and cocked .44 magnum revolver. He pointed it at Hattori, and yelled "Freeze." Simultaneously, Hattori, likely thinking he said "please", stepped back towards the house, saying "We're here for the party." Haymaker, seeing the weapon, shouted after Hattori, but Peairs fired his weapon at point blank range at Hattori, hitting him in the chest, and then ran back inside.[2] Haymaker rushed to Hattori, badly wounded and lying where he fell, on his back. Haymaker ran to the home next door to the Peairses' house for help."

    COMPLETELY different circumstances. Those kids were in Halloween costumes, got the address mixed up, walked up a walkway, rang the doorbell and were walking back to their car, and when confronted said that they were there for the party, and should NOT have been shot.

    This kid scaled a fence in the middle of the night, was prowling around the property and there was no doubt he wasn't supposed to be there. It was no accident he scaled that fence. He wasn't there to preach the Bible, that's for sure.

    So, no, not even close to the same things, and the only reason this guy is even looking at this whole situation is the Trayvon Martin thing. That's it. What's going to happen now is anyone that defends themselves against someone of another race is going to have the book thrown at them no matter what. Regardless of situation.
  5. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +441
    Talk about ad nauseam

    You just keep beating that drum big boy.
  6. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +441
    I think the pd does not want to deal with the scrutiny that sanford went through. That is why the guy was arrested and charged so severly so quickly. Lets wait and see what the facts are and how this plays out. I doubt the man was just itching to kill himself a black boy as some on this thread want to make all gun carriers out to be.
  7. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,481
    Likes Received:
    2,388
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,105
    And that's going to be the conundrum for a lot of gun owners. Do you defend yourself/your family and risk going through the level of harassment and hate from the media/special interest groups....or do you go ahead and let whoever it is take your stuff, break in, hurt you or your family and then live with that for the rest of your life?

    There will always be someone who will scream excuses and "there's no reason". Frankly the kid could've been inside, beating his wife to a pulp when the husband shot him and someone - INCLUDING some on this board - would claim that he should've just called police, or pulled him off, or tried reasoning with him, etc. You can't win.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. GatorFanCF
    Offline

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    4,372
    Likes Received:
    403
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,523
    When seconds count, the police are only moments away.

    Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?p=6709977#post6709977#ixzz2aYH9aMuc

    Sorry, I don't know what this means or how it fits into this case. I'm open to the foundation of it.

    Bottom line is people have to make decisions without all the info:
    Is person alone? (one person could "pretend" to need help while perp #2 knocks out homeowner).
    Is person armed?
    Is person there with bad intent?
    What if I do nothing and something bad happens?
    What if I do something and (it turns out) person was there innocently?
    Can the police be here in time? If so, will police be helpful or just shrug their shoulders?
    Does something bad have to happen before I can shoot?
    All this after being awakened at 1:40 am. As I said in my very first post (#2 after OP) this is very sad on several levels; and, I take no joy in the death nor possible permanent disability of this 14 year old boy. It's a wasted life. At the same time, I can empathize with the thought process of this homeowner; and, given the background of the perp, I hope the homeowner is exonerated.
  9. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +441
    To your point IQ
    One of the neighbors saw the boys casing the house earlier in the day. She told the reporter that she thought about calling the police but decided not to because she was scared she would be label as profiling little black kids. She even made reference to what happened to Zimmerman I believe.

    Now what if she HAD called the cops
    1. She gets labeled as a racist and for profiling but everyone is alive and well. Some on here no doubt think that is the fair and right thing

    2.The cops do nothing because seriously, what can they do and everything happens anyway.

    But now that our society labels any thing against a black person as profiling or racist......well theres really not much we can do to d&*ned if you do d&*ned if you dont
  10. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,481
    Likes Received:
    2,388
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,105
    On a slight tangent, I'm wondering if between the Zimmerman case and all the racial rhetoric lately if we're going to start seeing a further shift in demographics with respect to neighborhoods going back to a quasi-segregated status. Blacks are going to become increasingly (if not so already) suspicious of any white person, and whites are going to become so hyper-vigilant that they not do/say anything to offend someone, or that they wouldn't be able to defend themselves in case something happened like a normal person....I think that with all the racial language and undercurrent being put out there by Jackson, Sharpton, MSM, etc, they are actually setting BACK any kind of advancements and folks are going to become more and more uncomfortable.
  11. SmootyGator
    Offline

    SmootyGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Tampa, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +885
  12. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,924
    Likes Received:
    646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,344

    Well said.
  13. whitelakegator
    Offline

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +20
    Well, because I haven't seen you or any other gun owner address it. You bang on that the 2nd lets you have a gun, right? BUT what about the rest of the Bill of Rights, eh? Should we IGNORE the rest? Is that your answer? Hypocrisy at its finest.
  14. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,448
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +1,026
    Bill of Rights?

    Is that like when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
  15. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +441
    How would like me to address it further.
    I have made clear that I do not think killing someone for theft is appropriate.
    I have made clear that I believe this kid forfieted hi rights when he trampled on another individuals right.
    I have said that I understand why there was a percieved threat from this kid given the circumstances.
    So unless you want to just say that no shooting is justified in any circumstance then I believe I have addressed why your bill of rights hypocrisy claim is false.

    This was not a case of theft or burglary.
    It was not a case of a man knowing what was happening
    It was again a case of a man being put in a position to make a choice. A choice between what he percieved to be a danger to himself and his family verses becoming a danger to that threat. He chose to become a danger.

    The kid crossed over a tall locked iron fence. He approached a strangers home in the dead of night. He did not try to flee when lights went on and when the dog started barking.

    He left, imho, the homeowner very little choice given the place, time and circumstances.

    Is it a shame? yes.

    If yu want to blame somebody try blaming the mother of this kid. 14 years old. Awaiting trial for breaking and entering. His family admits he was a professional thief. Not my words...theirs. He was the youngest of 8 children to a parent who very very obviously is not a fit parent.

    but no. Lets blame the vigilant father who protected his family. Who held a good job and supported his pregnant wife. Let's blame the victim once again because he luckily was able to defend himself against a thug.

    Do you call injustice everytime a cop has to decide to shoot a bad guy?
    What if this kid had been an adult. Rememebr the shooter had no way of knowing. What if, as you suggest he waited for the thief to enter his house, missed hi shot or failed to kill him and the man gets beaten, his wife raped and his daughter killed. Wouldthat have been so much fairer?
  16. whitelakegator
    Offline

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +20
    Did you ever respond to my question...do you think he would have went outside if he did not have a gun? If not, why?
  17. Tasselhoff
    Offline

    Tasselhoff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +441
    I have no idea.
    Maybe he would have gone outside if he had a shotgun or a bat or a fire poker. Maybe he would have taken a hockey stick. How do I know. What difference can it possibly make unless your real bent is about gun OWNERSHIP and less about what transpired that night.
    You have said deragatory things about me, about many gun owners and about CCW holders. You have continuously made this about the 2nd admendment...when it has absolutely nothing to do with that night and only is of intrest if what you really want is argue against gun ownership.

    Jsut admit it. you do not like people owning guns. You blame the tragedy that happened here to the ownership of a gun...since that seems to be your focus, and do not put the blame on the shoulders of the young man who was tresspassing and moving towards a strangers housein the middle of the night.
  18. GolphinGator
    Online

    GolphinGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,845
    Likes Received:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Gainesville/ Micanopy
    Ratings Received:
    +281
  19. whitelakegator
    Offline

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +20
    Wrong again. I say own as many guns as you want. 100? No problem. The second you take them outside and use them on others? I have a problem unless it is clear cut and dry self defense(meaning you had NO OTHER option but to shoot and kill them). If you go LOOKING for trouble armed and reckless...I have a problem. No reason to go outside. None. Zero.
  20. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,085
    And that is why the laws must be in place which can try to deter people from recklessly killing others.

    What if it were some teen being stupid and took a worthless sign from your property in the middle of the day? Or some homeless fella who opened your car door because he saw some loose change in your tray? Would you sure as hell just shoot them dead over a worthless sign or some change? If so, then I'd say you would very much deserve to the prison time that you don't seem to care about. But I'd also suspect that it wouldn't too long after going into the clink for you to realize what an absolute mess you made of your life (and others lives) in the name of tough-guy braggadocio.

    The problem is only imagining the worst case scenario and basing a response only on the fear it provokes but without any other considerations taken into account. Inside the house, few/no questions asked; self defense under the castle doctrine is the most expansive here for good reason. But on one's property outside the home, well that presents something different since there are many more situational factors outside the home that might come into play, many of which would require us to use more prudent and reasonable judgment. With this in mind, unquestionably allowing any amount of force outside the home in an expansive way as inside the home is just begging more people to simply shoot and kill anyone for even the slightest of provocations or trespass.

    That being said, I am with you, I sure as heck hope I never have to be in such a situation, and I am prepared if it arises. And quite frankly, I've had multiple "minor" incidents (including car break-ins in my driveway; I live in a city) where I've had to confront folks. And I would use the necessary force if I had to, but I wouldn't go shooting someone for just being on my property even at 2am. Not at least without yelling from the inside that I am armed and the police have been called. If they stay or start to do something that is a real threat (such as trying to break in), well that might call for a different response, but it doesn't allow us to be reckless about it.
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page