A Montana man who set trap convicted of homicide.

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: CT8
Thieves and criminals are a protected class .


Except that the defendant baited the person into the garage. He hid concealed and coaxed the man in and then shot him. That's called hunting and we can do that to deer, but not to people.

If the thief broke into the home, that's different.


You can't coax the unwilling...the perp had no business being in this guys garage, period!


And the convicted murderer had no business planning it. Or firing blindly several times.

 

[datech]

Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!



So much for defending his property. The homeowner will no doubt suffer a serious penalty.

Then the family from Germany will sue his estate for every penny.

A lesson for those who want to take the law into their own hands.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: datech
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!



So much for defending his property. The homeowner will no doubt suffer a serious penalty.

Then the family from Germany will sue his estate for every penny.

A lesson for those who want to take the law into their own hands.


The minimum is 10 years in Montana.

 

[datech]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: datech
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!



So much for defending his property. The homeowner will no doubt suffer a serious penalty.

Then the family from Germany will sue his estate for every penny.

A lesson for those who want to take the law into their own hands.


The minimum is 10 years in Montana.


That is unfortunate.

Make no mistake about this: the KID was wrong to break into the garage. He would be alive today if he hadn't done so. It's too bad that kids these days take risks like that but I don't know if it is really only a recent development. They were 'garage hopping' probably after drinking at a party. Maybe the kid was looking for pot to smoke.


Police face many difficult decisions in their daily duties. Sometimes they get stuck with charges for events like what happened in Ferguson, MO. But they understand the law, even if most people don't. The cop in Ferguson was threatened with his own gun. He really could have been reasonably in fear of his life. Nevertheless he probably wishes he could do it over again and he would probably try a different tactic than shooting if at all possible. The grand jury did not indict him but his career is currently in shambles. Another unfortunate side effect of crime. And he was a sworn officer of the law.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: datech
They were 'garage hopping'


Is that the new politically correct term for 'home burglary spree'?

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: datech

That is completely preposterous.

The kid: a good student, a confirmed burglar with unknown intentions, athlete, completely unarmed. Did not make any threat (the shooting was filmed)



Fixed.

 

[02SE]

The jury reached their decision, and that's fine. The problem I have is the idea that this burglar was baited.

As I said, I have valuables in my garage. If I step inside the house while the garage door is still open, am I now baiting any and all thieves to come steal from me?

This darling little exchange student was a thief. Apparently his exchange student buddy from Equador, was too. Although he at least had a shred of sense, and didn't enter the garage.

If the kid hadn't been out stealing, he'd probably still be alive today. Unless of course he was killed in another burglary, later on.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: datech


Make no mistake about this: the KID was wrong to break into the garage.



Unfortunate it is. I'd prefer the death penalty.

Make no mistake about this: The kid did not break into anything. Kind of hard to break into an open door.

And make no mistake about this: You do not have the right to lie in wait for someone to walk through a door *you* left *open* and left *bait* in *plain sight* so you can shoot them.

The convicted murderer was hoping to shoot someone. The jury thought so.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!


I pray you are never in this situation.


I hope not...if I find someone in the garage, I hold him and call (actually, I make HIM call) 911.

 

[datech]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!


I pray you are never in this situation.


I hope not...if I find someone in the garage, I hold him and call (actually, I make HIM call) 911.



Smart move. Enforcing the laws is dangerous for whoever does it. The best thing to do is try to remove yourself from the danger and let professionals do it. Of course you want to help them as appropriate. Video is helpful, for example.

 

[datech]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
The jury reached their decision, and that's fine. The problem I have is the idea that this burglar was baited.

As I said, I have valuables in my garage. If I step inside the house while the garage door is still open, am I now baiting any and all thieves to come steal from me?

This darling little exchange student was a thief. Apparently his exchange student buddy from Equador, was too. Although he at least had a shred of sense, and didn't enter the garage.

If the kid hadn't been out stealing, he'd probably still be alive today. Unless of course he was killed in another burglary, later on.



The homeowner could have baited the garage and then either just turned the video in to police, or maybe he could have tried to hold the kid. He could have planned something other than shooting. Maybe he could have latched down the door then shut off the power, trapping the kid in the garage.

The homeowner won't be sentenced for baiting somebody, he's convicted of murder.

Yeah, the kid screwed up, but as a group, 17 year old kids screw up a lot. Not legal to shot them for it in all cases.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: aa1986
Does it bother anyone else that there are more people in this thread that feel the homeowner was justified than there are posters who recognize that this was murder?


Doesn't bother me a bit.

There is no statistical significance to the number of posters on this thread.

I made all the points I care to make on the use of lethal force previously. Go read that thread to see, if you're interested, but I don't feel like rehashing it for a new set of "keyboard corage" types who don't understand what constitutes a threat and what constitutes manslaughter.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3363717/1


Once more from the top: I care not at all if the dude was in any danger. I am 100% fine with burglars being SHOT DEAD ON SIGHT!


Killing over property is morally reprehensible.

It is also manslaughter, or worse, in most jurisdictions.

I have no problem with killing to prevent serious bodily harm or loss of life.

But the use of lethal force requires a lethal threat be present.

Simple burglary doesn't constitute that threat.

You may be OK with killing a burglar, but if you're ever in that situation, I pray you don't kill to defend your stuff. At best, you've killed for an insufficient reason, and at worst, you go to jail for a long time.

 

[aa1986]

I didn't think of this point too much until the thread was flooded with those defending the homeowner.

Even if you think what he did was morally justified and the law should be changed, his actions put his family in danger.

He let an intruder into his garage and then went outside. What if the intruder went into his house where his kids were?

I guess I am fortunate to be able to live in an area where we don't have such a trigger happy mentality nor such a disregard for human life and still manage to have an ultra low crime rate.

The vigilantes have truly become like those they claim to protect us from.

 

[jrmason]

Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Thankfully for you and your family, you did not have a confrontation. It is a terrifying experience not being in control of your loved ones safety. Knowing how that made you feel, how would you feel if it happened 2 more times in a matter of weeks? This was the 3rd time in less than 3 weeks they'd been burglarized. Your dam right I'd be on edge, [censored] off, and scared for my families safety. And probably wake up several times a night to check my property. Definitely have a surveillance system installed if I did not already have one. Whether or not they left a door open or not SHOULD be irrelevant. Whether or not a purse was left out SHOULD be irellevant. The homeowner was victimized back to back to back. He did not bait anyone the first 2 times he was broken into and yet he still got broken into. He was not out looking for trouble.


What an illogical post. Instead of deterring the threat you would invite the threat into your home in a vain attempt to instill some good ole street justice that could endanger you and your family further.


Right. Because leaving a door open is really "baiting" or "inviting" someone to victimize you. So is failing to lock a door, or opening the windows at night to cool your home off after a hot summer day. We all better start locking our possessions up like Ft Knox so we don't tempt any would be thugs into taking our belongings. And when they kick the door down anyway (because that's what thugs do when they want something, just like this thug did the first two times) then we all better run out the back and let them have their way. Is that more logical to you?

 

[Shannow]

I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...

 

[jrmason]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...


I don't think anybody said they were OK with that. I certainly did not. It's really not even pertinent to the subject, as other homes had been broken into recently in the neighborhood as well. This kid was performing crimes on a regular basis, and I concede he did not deserve to die over a simple robbery but how can you tell what someones intentions are when they break into your home? All too often, robberies end up the other way around with the homeowners paying the ultimate price with their lives, or being raped or kidnapped. That is why I feel no remorse for someone who takes it upon themselves to help them selves to the possessions you've worked too hard for, and ultimately your sense of security away from you.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...


Probably heavy use too. Which could explain the huge lack of thought he put into this.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...


Probably heavy use too. Which could explain the huge lack of thought he put into this.


Drug testing revealed he was on marijuana at the time of the murder.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...


Don't care one way or the other, honestly.

 

[datech]

Originally Posted By: jrmason
Originally Posted By: Shannow
I can't believe how many people are fine with this guy growing and distributing drugs...


I don't think anybody said they were OK with that. I certainly did not. It's really not even pertinent to the subject, as other homes had been broken into recently in the neighborhood as well. This kid was performing crimes on a regular basis, and I concede he did not deserve to die over a simple robbery but how can you tell what someones intentions are when they break into your home? All too often, robberies end up the other way around with the homeowners paying the ultimate price with their lives, or being raped or kidnapped. That is why I feel no remorse for someone who takes it upon themselves to help them selves to the possessions you've worked too hard for, and ultimately your sense of security away from you.




The reason the drugs are important is they were the reason the homeowner couldn't involve the police, and so took the matter into his own hands.