Is this self-defense, or murder??? What do you think? Watch this vid...

[doublejs07]

Originally Posted by MexicanSoul

Originally Posted by Essential1

Here's what I got from this.. 1 Bullet fine, 3-4 at the same time is still fine. But the minute he ran out of the store chasing the other robber, went inside and inserted 5 shots that is no longer self defense. Self defense under the law is reasonable force to get yourself out of the situation.

Not only did the robber not have a gun he was on the floor shot in the abdomen.


Murder.. 20-25 years. Up for Parole in 15. He could've called the cops and kept the gun on the guy.

/thread.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously jaded, racist or has a chip on their shoulder.

I don't see it that way one bit....if someone is trying to rob, hurt, or burglarize you or something you own...they are fair game. +!%% allthis compassion for the criminal...dude made a bad choice in agreeing to go in there w. his boy to rob the pharmacy. The owner was protecting himself and hisemployees. You go in there with ill-intentions, then you have to be prepared for you OG plan to backfire. In this case there was a death, and like I saidbefore, I feel ZERO pity or remorse for the kid that died.

 

[dyzzle]

serves that robber right. +%#*+!%.

 

[lakersmets49ers]

Originally Posted by Mr Anleu

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by Mr Anleu

smh at you guys saying the kid deserved...maybe you guys haven't heard of the consitution but it states that nobody can have their life liberty or pursuit of happiness taken away from them without due process. yes, the kid would have been found guilty anyway but that was for a jury of his peers and for a judge to decide what his punishment should be.

if what this man did is justifiable than the kids family should be able to shoot him for having killed their son.

f the constitution. if you try and rob me its either my life or your life. the constitution also says we have the right to bear arms.

why should the kids family be able to shoot the guy??

at f the constitution..the family should be able to shoot him because he took the law into his own hands. he didnt have the right to kill him because even if the kid was convicted of robbing the store he wouldnt get the death penalty. therefore, the punishment the guy gave this kid is cruel and unusual. furthermore the police can't even verify that they opened fire on the guy so u don't even know if their intent was to kill him..you're just assuming.

a better way the guy could've handled it is he could have taken the kids weapon once on the floor and if he got up then he could've pinned him down with his weapon until the police arrived.

obviously the constitution doesn't do its job all the time, you got convicted sex offenders getting a year, while in other states people get more timefor minor stuff.

what punishment did the kid get? from what i recall he did try and rob a store if you have no regard for human life where your putting your life, and othersin danger, then you don't deserve to live.

what if one of those poor ladies in the store got so scared when the kids tried robbing the place that she had a heart attack where would the outrage bethere?

to my knowledge if two kids go in to my house and try to rob me and i shot one of them dead its me defending myself not me punishing the little accident.

to hell with a better way, i'm sure in the heat of the moment in a situation like that logic gets thrown out the door. i have no regard for a criminalslife.

too me this guy needs to be looked at as a hero like bernie goetz is. bernie goetz defended himself when some stickup kids tried to rob him, one of thekids is a vegtable now and the world is a better place because of it, the other 3 kids ended up commiting violent crimes again afterwards. he ended up doingthe right thing and shot one of the kids excessivly and said "You don't look too bad, here's another." before shooting him again. he got offwith a slap on the wrist because the kids brought it upon themselves.

had the constitution tried to handle it we would hear about how oh, "their just kids who made a mistake lets give them community service"

 

[mextra45]

The first shot in the head was self defense but the next five were not needed .

 

[drunken cow]

Originally Posted by MexicanSoul

Originally Posted by Essential1

Here's what I got from this.. 1 Bullet fine, 3-4 at the same time is still fine. But the minute he ran out of the store chasing the other robber, went inside and inserted 5 shots that is no longer self defense. Self defense under the law is reasonable force to get yourself out of the situation.

Not only did the robber not have a gun he was on the floor shot in the abdomen.


Murder.. 20-25 years. Up for Parole in 15. He could've called the cops and kept the gun on the guy.

/thread.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is seriously jaded, racist or has a chip on their shoulder.

Jaded? Racist? Lol.

Their putting on ski mask and trying to rob someone else's hard earn money. This dude deserves to be six feet under.

 

[ericberry14]

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland caseweren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

 

[lakersmets49ers]

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

the other 5 were probably out of rage or anger.

sean bell or the oakland situation are bad examples to use because in those situations the people who got killed were innocent and didn't deserve any ofthe crap that happened to him.

this kid robbed a store, if i decided to go rob someone or someplace, i'm putting my life on the line and risking whatever the consequences may be.

 

[ericberry14]

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

the other 5 were probably out of rage or anger.

sean bell or the oakland situation are bad examples to use because in those situations the people who got killed were innocent and didn't deserve any of the crap that happened to him.

this kid robbed a store, if i decided to go rob someone or someplace, i'm putting my life on the line and risking whatever the consequences may be.

i didnt use them as example... i said the people who think the store owner is right... probably think the police were right in those situationstoo...

i just dont see how you figure this kid deserved to die for what he attempted to do...

Robbery= you deserve to die... like i said its a sad world that we live in if people think like that...

and **** with that the other 5 bullets were out of anger... the man walked right past the kid i think twice... then reloaded his gun & calmly walked rightback over to him... shot him 5 times... then walked away...

he showed no signs of acting out in anger, none at all...

 

[jumpshot]

Originally Posted by ericberry14

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

the other 5 were probably out of rage or anger.

sean bell or the oakland situation are bad examples to use because in those situations the people who got killed were innocent and didn't deserve any of the crap that happened to him.

this kid robbed a store, if i decided to go rob someone or someplace, i'm putting my life on the line and risking whatever the consequences may be.

i just dont see how you figure this kid deserved to die for what he attempted to do...

Because he tried to rob a store with another dude at gun point. That's just plain stupid. You're putting yourself and others at risk bydoing that. If you die doing what this kid did, you probably deserved it because that's what was coming to you for doing something so stupid. It'sbasically social darwinism. It's like swimming in a pool during a thunderstorm.

 

[enlightened thought]

Robbery= you deserve to die... like i said its a sad world that we live in if people think like that...

and **** with that the other 5 bullets were out of anger... the man walked right past the kid i think twice... then reloaded his gun & calmly walked right back over to him... shot him 5 times... then walked away...

he showed no signs of acting out in anger, none at all...
robber walked in with a weapon with the intention to rob, and maybe even harm another individual? you're lamenting the life of a criminal. what kind of society do we live in where that happens?

while the guy did go overboard, in no way do I feel remorseful that a criminal happened to die the other day.

 

[ctdaprince]

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

QFT

 

[moonmaster3]

I'm just upset that the store owner couldn't clip off that other goon.

 

[ericberry14]

Originally Posted by Jumpshot

Originally Posted by ericberry14

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

the other 5 were probably out of rage or anger.

sean bell or the oakland situation are bad examples to use because in those situations the people who got killed were innocent and didn't deserve any of the crap that happened to him.

this kid robbed a store, if i decided to go rob someone or someplace, i'm putting my life on the line and risking whatever the consequences may be.

i just dont see how you figure this kid deserved to die for what he attempted to do...

Because he tried to rob a store with another dude at gun point. That's just plain stupid. You're putting yourself and others at risk by doing that. If you die doing what this kid did, you probably deserved it because that's what was coming to you for doing something so stupid. It's basically social darwinism. It's like swimming in a pool during a thunderstorm.

i get what you're saying...

but the kid didnt deserve the other 5 shots he received... the other 5 shots were not in self defense, not in the least...

and IMO the only people that deserve to die are serial killers, rapists, child molesters, and someone who kills in cold-blood(certain circumstances areexcluded)...

what the owner did was murder, he shouldnt spend life in prison, but he should most definitely do some time for his actions...

 

[emmanuel goldstein]

i love that the first people to pull the whole "constitution" card, are the same people who voted for obama and the same people who call themselves"liberals" .. LMAO

 

[bwoodfolkgd74]

it is murder...


it was no longer self defense.

 

[h1ghstar]

Thats Murder.

 

[illoquent aka dsk]

Originally Posted by MR MONDAY NIIGHT

Originally Posted by dendanskesimon

Originally Posted by WallyHopp

Originally Posted by DatZNasty

Originally Posted by cardizzle45

I am sure that defense will say that the employees mens rea was not in the right state of mind. When someone is put in a situation like that there are emotions that arise in a split second that throws common sense out the window. I am sure the defense will mention that the employee had no idea that the robber didn't have a weapon therefore he didn't know if the robber was NO longer a threat. I am pretty sure he won't be found guilty of murder.

You know in New York there was a case where a kid was threatening a young man and his father verbally as well as with racial epithets, the kid then approached them and breached their property, again while making threats and the father shot and killed him in what he thoug was self defense. He is now doing life in prison.

In another more publicized similar situation, a guy saw 2 men robbing the home of a neighbor whom he admittedly doesn't know, called 911 and then tauntingly told the 911 operator he was going to go out there and kill them himself despite the 911 operators many attempts to tell him not to. He is now a neighborhood hero and still at the house, scott free.

I left out the races of all the parties involved, but race and social class and political affiliations so affect the way things like this are judged, that you can easily figure it out.

so thats how it ended?

how is that possible? was there no other means to stop them? if you cant within your means why not let them go free and let the cops go in on them?

not how it happened. He was trying to defend his neighbors stuff, he didnt say it tauntingly, he was an old guy who staunchly believed in defending his neighborhood. He goes out there and tells the guys "stop or I will shoot you" perfectly warns them, they try to jet so he shoots them both with the shotty. Im glad he did it and got off free, they were stealing, and he should be able to defend the area, especially since his neighbor wasnt home, is he just supposed to sit there and watch them loot and pillage indefensible possessions?

However, for this case, what do you think would be happening if he just shot the guy 5-6 times all at once and didnt wait?

That is how it happened. He got away with murder because people in Texas have a cowboy mentality that it's ok to shoot someone. The dispatcher repeatedly told him to not go outside. He defied authority when he went outside... He also had the requisite intent to shoot to kill. Therefore.. he is culpable for murder.

Exactly.

Thanks for typing up that post, you saved me the time...dendanskesimon doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[forgot about jae]

Dude's going to jail. He acted way outside of his right to self-defense and hopefully gets charged with murder. We have laws in America, you are underabsolutely no jurisdiction to act out of emotion and/or take the law into your own hands. You deserve to get punished if you act outside of the law..The Kidacted outside of the law and if he were to have got caught, he would've been in jail soon. The overzealous rent-a-cop acted outside of the law and MURDEREDsomebody. That is classified as murder

 

[juju]

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Goldstein

i love that the first people to pull the whole "constitution" card, are the same people who voted for obama and the same people who call themselves "liberals" .. LMAO

and now it all be comes OH SO CLEAR. why am i not surprised you have something against Obama and are also the type to APPLAUD a man for taking a16 year old black kids life unnecessarily? because someone's a liberal you cant support the constitution? liberals don't have a problem with theconstituiton they have a problem with those in power trying to askew its meaning to benefit their own agendas conservative or liberal i think everyone shouldhave a problem with that...

 

[moonmaster3]

Originally Posted by Forgot About Jae

Dude's going to jail. He acted way outside of his right to self-defense and hopefully gets charged with murder. We have laws in America, you are under absolutely no jurisdiction to act out of emotion and/or take the law into your own hands. You deserve to get punished if you act outside of the law..The Kid acted outside of the law and if he were to have got caught, he would've been in jail soon. The overzealous rent-a-cop acted outside of the law and MURDERED somebody. That is classified as murder

If only that is how the law actually works.

 

[lakersmets49ers]

Originally Posted by JuJu

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Goldstein

i love that the first people to pull the whole "constitution" card, are the same people who voted for obama and the same people who call themselves "liberals" .. LMAO

and now it all be comes OH SO CLEAR. why am i not surprised you have something against Obama and are also the type to APPLAUD a man for taking a 16 year old black kids life unnecessarily? because someone's a liberal you cant support the constitution? liberals don't have a problem with the constituiton they have a problem with those in power trying to askew its meaning to benefit their own agendas conservative or liberal i think everyone should have a problem with that...

black kid, white kid, green kid, purple kid i could care less what color the kid is, its not unnecessary when the kid attempted to rob a store and put otherpeoples lifes in danger. you can make an argument about the excessive shots but at the end of the day you can't reason with criminals.

now if i shoot a 16 year kid just because i'm bored or because he looked at me wrong thats unnecessary. the kid brought what he got upon himself.

 

[lakersmets49ers]

Originally Posted by ericberry14

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by ericberry14

I swear some of you dudes on NT are some of the most elitist/stuck-up/unrealistic people in the world...

Some of yall claiming you would do the same thing... you people that say the kid deserved to die have no regard for human life... lets just give a timeline

Two kids attempt to rob the store.
One kid gets shot in the head... on ground unconscious
Then the owner runs out of the store after the other guy
Comes back into the store, walks past the unconscious kid
Goes in the back & reloads his gun
Comes back to the kid & unloads 5 more shots into him...

And some of you claim that the other 5 shots were still in self-defense...

And i bet the people saying the guy did nothing wrong are the same people who think the cops in the sean bell case weren't wrong, the cops in oakland case weren't wrong...

Its a sad society we live in when self defense extends to when the assailant is on the ground unconscious...

the other 5 were probably out of rage or anger.

sean bell or the oakland situation are bad examples to use because in those situations the people who got killed were innocent and didn't deserve any of the crap that happened to him.

this kid robbed a store, if i decided to go rob someone or someplace, i'm putting my life on the line and risking whatever the consequences may be.

i didnt use them as example... i said the people who think the store owner is right... probably think the police were right in those situations too...

i just dont see how you figure this kid deserved to die for what he attempted to do...

Robbery= you deserve to die... like i said its a sad world that we live in if people think like that...

and **** with that the other 5 bullets were out of anger... the man walked right past the kid i think twice... then reloaded his gun & calmly walked right back over to him... shot him 5 times... then walked away...

he showed no signs of acting out in anger, none at all...

i'm going to put it like this. if i'm working at a store and some people come in and try to rob me and i have a gun i'm shooting because it'seither me or them. they might be unarmed but for all i know they might be some dangerous killer who has no regard for his life or my life. theres been a bunchof times around my area where liquor stores get held up and the employee gets killed during the robbery, why take that chance?


i wouldn't say robbery = you deserve to die its more like robbery = you attempting to forcefully steal something from someone, and if that victimdecides to defend themselves whatever happens happens.

you can make the argument about him overdoing it by going to shoot him some more and its a valid argument but this all could have been avoided had that 16year old teenager did what alot of teenagers do which is get a work permit and get a part time job rather then try and rob and steal what others worked for.

 

[thunderchunk69]

I would have peed all over his "unconscious" body, not shot him 5 more times

Kids like these don't have any parents, they're let to roam free with guns starting trouble, yes they deserve a 2nd chance, but not when they'rerunning around with a friend that has a gun threatening my life.

but the 5 shots after he laid on the floor makes the store owner a criminal as well.

 

[bwoodfolkgd74]

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by JuJu

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Goldstein

i love that the first people to pull the whole "constitution" card, are the same people who voted for obama and the same people who call themselves "liberals" .. LMAO

and now it all be comes OH SO CLEAR. why am i not surprised you have something against Obama and are also the type to APPLAUD a man for taking a 16 year old black kids life unnecessarily? because someone's a liberal you cant support the constitution? liberals don't have a problem with the constituiton they have a problem with those in power trying to askew its meaning to benefit their own agendas conservative or liberal i think everyone should have a problem with that...

black kid, white kid, green kid, purple kid i could care less what color the kid is, its not unnecessary when the kid attempted to rob a store and put other peoples lifes in danger. you can make an argument about the excessive shots but at the end of the day you can't reason with criminals.

now if i shoot a 16 year kid just because i'm bored or because he looked at me wrong thats unnecessary. the kid brought what he got upon himself.

100% right with the bold part....the rest of what you said doesn't matter

what that man did still wasn't self defense, the last part of what he did that is.

if he would have killed him with the initial shot this probably wouldn't be an issue.

at the end of the day you can't reason with criminals...but you can become one

 

[juju]

Originally Posted by lakersmets49ers

Originally Posted by JuJu

Originally Posted by Emmanuel Goldstein

i love that the first people to pull the whole "constitution" card, are the same people who voted for obama and the same people who call themselves "liberals" .. LMAO

and now it all be comes OH SO CLEAR. why am i not surprised you have something against Obama and are also the type to APPLAUD a man for taking a 16 year old black kids life unnecessarily? because someone's a liberal you cant support the constitution? liberals don't have a problem with the constituiton they have a problem with those in power trying to askew its meaning to benefit their own agendas conservative or liberal i think everyone should have a problem with that...

black kid, white kid, green kid, purple kid i could care less what color the kid is, its not unnecessary when the kid attempted to rob a store and put other peoples lifes in danger. you can make an argument about the excessive shots but at the end of the day you can't reason with criminals.

now if i shoot a 16 year kid just because i'm bored or because he looked at me wrong thats unnecessary. the kid brought what he got upon himself.

WHAT THE HELL IS THERE TO REASON ABOUT WHEN OL BOY IS ON THE GROUND SUFFERING FROM A LITERAL HEAD SHOT? THE BOY WASNT GONNA ARGUE THE FINER POINTSOF PLATO AND NIETZSCHE.