If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News Tribune)   NJ grand jury refuses to indict man who shot burglars on his property   (thnt.com) divider line 627
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

22192 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2004 at 2:58 PM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



627 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-10-22 11:33:07 AM  
It's about time the wheels of justice spin in the right direction, forward instead of reverse all the time!
 
2004-10-22 11:37:45 AM  
hot damn.. that is sweet. excellent news.
 
2004-10-22 11:41:32 AM  
Gawd I love stories with a happy ending!
 
2004-10-22 11:41:36 AM  
Yeah, all people who commit felonies deserve be killed. Except those running for office as republicans. They are heroes.
 
2004-10-22 11:42:41 AM  
"Spokesman Bernie Weisenfeld said prosecutors are considering all their options on where to continue, including presenting the case to a second grand jury."

Nice. Keep throwing shiat against the wall, and maybe it will eventually stick.
 
2004-10-22 11:47:48 AM  
Yeah, all people who commit felonies deserve be killed.

If you break in to my house while I am in it, I will assume that one of us is leaving feet first, and will do everything I can to make sure it is not me, or my girl.
 
2004-10-22 11:49:40 AM  
What? This happened in New Jersey? Unpossible. New Jersey would like to prosecute you for even thinking about having a gun in the first place, much less shooting anyone.
 
2004-10-22 11:50:38 AM  
Don't feed the trolls, EatHam.

Back on topic... I see the homeowner exercized proper gun control. Two hands and point it at only things you don't mind being dead.
 
2004-10-22 11:50:58 AM  
I wonder why he decided to shoot at the guy though. Did the guy have a weapon... was he unable to control the guy using the threat of firing his gun? I guess I would have liked to have a little more detail to decide if this guy did do the right thing or not.

If the guy had a weapon and came at the guy who owned the property, I could see him not being charged (protecting himself, his family, and his property).

If the guy just saw a couple guys out there trying to steal his vehicle and shot without warning, or shot without seeing any kind of weapon... then I'm not so sure this was the right call...

Definately need more details before I could make a good call on this one.
 
2004-10-22 11:51:02 AM  
I'm not familiar with the grand jury system. If they don't indict him, is it okay for the prosecutors to try again and again until one does indict him? I would've thought that'd be double jeopardy or a variant of it.
 
2004-10-22 11:53:32 AM  
Finally, some justice in the world.
 
2004-10-22 11:53:34 AM  
Oh so having an opinion the Conservatives don't agree with makes me a troll? Geeze.
 
2004-10-22 11:54:46 AM  
Actually, EatHam that would be fine. The point is this guy did not break into the house. As such, the occupants of the house were NOT in danger. It's the same thing, if people break into your house, see you, and run away, and you run out after them, and shoot them, you will be charged. To use deadly force, you, or someone else's life must be in imminent danger.
 
2004-10-22 11:57:21 AM  
OK, I'll revise. Substitute house with property.
 
2004-10-22 11:57:49 AM  
nice troll knuckle, im about as left as one could get. if somebody comes into your home, or onto your property, they will get plugged- bottom line. it's common sense.
 
2004-10-22 12:00:28 PM  
maybe the asshole didnt "deserve" to die, but he farked up real bad when he tried to rob that guy. no one can deny that when you do something like that, you've got to expect that a scenario like that could occur. real bad decision making on the part of the dead guy.
 
2004-10-22 12:01:44 PM  
I wonder why he decided to shoot at the guy though. Did the guy have a weapon.

Sorry...doesn't matter. The perp already showed his disdain for the law by breaking into the vicitim's property. At that point all bets are off.

One less criminal is on the streets...they ought to pin a medal on him...

 
2004-10-22 12:04:33 PM  
The whole problem I have is that you all think these kind of home invasions happen all the time, and I feel sorry for you, living in such abject fear of a basically harmless place like Suburban America. But this fear really tears up America, creating this paranoid fear of crime and criminals. But arguing that is kind of pointless... we're never going to see eye to eye.

But it's annoying that I'm being called a troll. Are we really at that low a point, where anyone who doesn't agree with you, even if they're a known poster for over 2 years, is just a troll?
 
2004-10-22 12:07:00 PM  
I don't care if home invasions happen all the time. It's never happened to me, and I would wager that this was one of, if not the first time it happened to this guy. Doesn't matter. If someone is desperate enough to steal my stuff, who knows what else they will do. I'm not willing to risk my girls life, my life, or even my dog's life finding out.
 
2004-10-22 12:09:09 PM  
EatHam it's really more this idea of "Yay! Another dead criminal! America is a better place!" that I object to. It just indicates that people really have no idea who criminals are or why crime happens.
I'd defend my house too, I just wouldn't want to kill someone.
 
2004-10-22 12:12:03 PM  
Good night asshole :)
 
2004-10-22 12:12:38 PM  
But it's annoying that I'm being called a troll. Are we really at that low a point, where anyone who doesn't agree with you, even if they're a known poster for over 2 years, is just a troll?

I feel your pain...honestly...
 
2004-10-22 12:12:41 PM  
I prefer to arm myself with a massive armory of renter's insurance.

(pacifist)
 
2004-10-22 12:15:31 PM  
I wouldn't want to kill someone either. It's not something that I aspire to. I would though. Not happily, but I would do it.
 
2004-10-22 12:21:28 PM  
I think the sparking point knucklebreather is your attempt to transform this incident into a political discussion. This is about a person protecting his property, and not getting prosecuted. Not Dem vs. Rep lite.
 
2004-10-22 12:29:33 PM  
its amazing what the sound of a shotgun being pumped will do to people.
its a universally known sound.
 
2004-10-22 12:29:36 PM  
The concern that I have I alluded to earlier. The criminal has already shown that the law means nada to him. Let's say that next time he comes into someone's house and the homeowner surprises him. A few things will happen.

1. The criminal runs off like a scalded cat.
2. The criminal decides to fight and the crime victim gets hurt or killed.
3. The crime victim decides to fight and the criminal gets hurt or killed.

In scenario #1 or #2, the criminal comes out ahead and has the opportunity to ply his trade a little more. In #3, the crime victim comes out ahead and other criminals might think twice before practicing their craft on others. Of course there are other scenarios that will no doubt be brought forth here, but as some of you choose to be a pacifist, I choose not to be.

I would bet that if one person let it be known that he would never be armed or put up a fight and another let it be known that he would fight bitterly to defend himself or his property, the former would be more likely to become a vicitm...
 
2004-10-22 12:29:49 PM  
Weaps it went to the core of my argument really, that people love demonizing criminals... but only some criminals, and there's something harmful about that outlook on the world. I was just satirizing that particular viewpoint with my initial post. I'm actually glad this didn't turn into a Dem Vs. Rep flamewar, sorry if I came off looking like I was trying to start one.
 
2004-10-22 01:03:22 PM  
The criminal has already shown that the law means nada to him.

Wrong. The criminal has already shown that *a* law means nada to him. Should we shoot all speeders, shoplifters, and tax evaders too? They're criminals, they might kill you and your family!
 
2004-10-22 01:08:14 PM  
This isn't as simple a matter as protecting your home from an invader. As much as I abhor the idea of needing to kill someone, I have to concede that when someone breaks into your house, they're pretty much forfeiting any legal protections over their safety. This, however, is a matter of someone being killed over a piece of property, in a yard, not inside, where there doesn't seem to be any immediate danger. If my neighbour walks onto my porch early in the morning and ganks my newspaper, that doesn't give me free reign to blow his head off.
 
2004-10-22 01:21:32 PM  
I love Texas. If someone breaks into your home or a vehicle on your property, and you *feel* as if your life is threatened, you can use deadly force.

As it should be. I work hard, buy all my stuff, and hurt no one.

God help the idiot that I catch. Having said that, my Jeep was broken into last night costing me $400 bucks. If I had caught them, would I have shot them. Hard to say, they might have lived until the cops got here, but any sudden move and they would get buckshot to the face.
Would I feel bad? No. In short, fark them. They came to my house and broke into my shiat for selfish reasons.

Good for him. Don't attempt B&E and you won't get killed.
 
2004-10-22 01:36:16 PM  
My neighbor shot and killed a burglar a few years back. When he came into his house, the burglar was in the process of emptying his gun rack and he shot the guy dead right there. Everyone went around and congratulated him on his aim. Saved the legal system the hassle.
 
2004-10-22 01:54:54 PM  
Wrong. The criminal has already shown that *a* law means nada to him. Should we shoot all speeders, shoplifters, and tax evaders too?

There's a big difference between doing 80 in a 70 and breaking into another's home amigo...
 
2004-10-22 02:04:17 PM  
The article is a little vague as to the exact circumstances. He was trying to steal something from a shed. No real indication of what transpired just prior to the shooting, like "get out, I have a gun".

I have a conceiled handgun license and often carry. I strongly believe in the individuals right to protect themselves with deadly force if REQUIRED.

If someone is breaking into my house while I'm there, it's a safe assumption that they intend me harm. However, shooting someone who is trying to steal personal property is wrong. Again, the details are sketchy, but it doesn't say that the thief threatened him in any way.

This guy may have been set free by the grand jury, but trust me, even low lifes have relatives and he's going to get sued and lose that vehicle he was willing to kill to protect.

As I said, I am often packing and have justified in my mind what I will and will not pull the trigger for. Protecting my Suburban isn't on of them.
 
2004-10-22 02:28:59 PM  
Should we shoot all speeders, shoplifters, and tax evaders too?

That would be fine with me.
 
2004-10-22 03:03:59 PM  
Attempting to stop a thief caught in the act should be a legally protected right.

If you have a problem with that, DON'T FARKING STEAL.
 
2004-10-22 03:06:19 PM  
anyone remember this movie?
 
2004-10-22 03:06:30 PM  
Break in my place with me home, ya better off me or I'm gonna off you first..

/Plug a Thug for God
 
2004-10-22 03:06:40 PM  
the only thing that would make this story better is if the shooter is allowed to take the thief's TV!
 
2004-10-22 03:10:20 PM  
so everyone who thinks this is great news thinks that the shooter's car (his car!) is worth more than the burglar's life?
 
2004-10-22 03:10:31 PM  
From another article with more details:
"New Jersey law prohibits the use of deadly force to protect personal property. Deadly force can only be used in self-defense, defense of another person or protection of one's home."

This "hero" is a criminal according to NJ law.


Where does this stop?

Let's say instead of an ATV, the thief was going after a pair of sneakers the "hero" left out in the yard. He sees the thief and shoots him dead. Is he then still a hero for valiantly protecting his shoes? Where do we draw the line?

It's just a freakin ATV for chrissakes. And this man decided that his ATV is worth more than a man's life. And you folks agree.

That's just sick.
 
2004-10-22 03:10:56 PM  
i'd kill you in front of your mother for some migas right now
 
2004-10-22 03:10:57 PM  
Gun control is being able to hit your target.

/Card carrying member of the NRA and the California Rifle and Pistol Association.
 
2004-10-22 03:11:06 PM  
Dancin_In_Anson: "Sorry...doesn't matter. The perp already showed his disdain for the law by breaking into the vicitim's property. At that point all bets are off."

Shooting someone in self-defense: good.
Shooting someone for showing "disdain for the law": what the hell are you thinking?!
 
2004-10-22 03:12:47 PM  
mcflizzy

Attempting to stop a thief caught in the act should be a legally protected right.

It is. Taking a life to protect mere property is not (in NJ), nor should it be.
 
2004-10-22 03:12:53 PM  
AspiringPhilosopher, there aren't too many details on this, but what if the thief, was heading towards the armed guy, and he shot before the thief had a chance to mow him down? I think if someone's in your house / on your property, and a threat to your life, cap em'.

/god bless New Jersey
//New Jerseyite
 
2004-10-22 03:13:36 PM  
If his life could have been spared, that would have rocked. But when you are near anyone, or their family, and are in a position like this, then this kind of thing happens. Sadly, it does.
 
2004-10-22 03:13:41 PM  
If my neighbour walks onto my porch early in the morning and ganks my newspaper, that doesn't give me free reign to blow his head off

Of course not. Aim for center of mass. No head shots.
 
2004-10-22 03:14:11 PM  
I've said this before but it seems as though it needs to be said again. When someone illegaly comes on to my property to commit a crime I am going to assume the worst. I am going to assume they will hurt me or my family and act appropriately. If you want to hope and pray that they'll be nice cuddly criminals criminals and only steal your property and not bother you then that's your business but i'm not willing to do that.
 
2004-10-22 03:14:16 PM  
Thieves and most criminals deserve to be shot if they get caught in the act, or otherwise. Good work sir.
 
Displayed 50 of 627 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report