18 year old mom kills burgler while on phone w/ 911

[pietro11]

stark difference from a bay area "liberal"

[NinjaKix]

LMFAO @ warning shot from an 18 year old woman w/ a shotgun...BRB getting stabbed in the face as I try to recover from the kick and rack another shell.

[djo90]

my sincerest apologies. I only read OP's title and didnt read the article.

I still personally would not have shot the guy in the head

I hope you personally can be persuaded to shoot yourself in the head.

[pehzan]

good job

[para_gene]

lot of ******* miscers out today.

funny that most said they'd let orphans burn for money but if you shoot some criminal scumbag breaking into your house your garbage. what do you think would happen to her and the kid if she didn't?

brb, not waiting to find out.

[MikeD4386]

YOU are more than welcome to wrestle someone when they break into your house. Maybe when you're lying on your living room floor bleeding out because the burglar stabbed you with a knife, you'll realize that risking your life so that you could have a "fair fight" with a scumbag criminal was stupid.

Me, I'm not taking the risk. If someone breaks into my home and attempts to attack me, then they don't deserve a "fair fight". I have a gun so that I can WIN the fight.

I would not stand behind the soor with my gun aimed at head level waited for the door to creek open so I can kill someone.

I know everyone in the misc has JD from harvard but you still have to act with reasonable discretion. You guys who is saying she is going to get off easily are sadly mistaken. this will absolutely go to trial

[camdls1]

how can people defend the burglar's, if you want to break into someones house and break the law and steal peoples **** they worked hard for you deserve to die, why do we need people like this in society.

[mrawdtsi]

I would not stand behind the soor with my gun aimed at head level waited for the door to creek open so I can kill someone.

I know everyone in the misc has JD from harvard but you still have to act with reasonable discretion. You guys who is saying she is going to get off easily are sadly mistaken. this will absolutely go to trial

No DA in their right mind will prosecute a young, recently widowed mother who was protecting her INFANT.... especially in OK.

per Oklahoma House Bil 1439 she will never go to trial.

A. The Legislature hereby recognizes that the citizens of the State of Oklahoma have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes or places of business.
B. A person or an owner, manager or employee of a business is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
1. The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or a place of business, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against the will of that person from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or place of business; and
2. The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
C. The presumption set forth in subsection B of this section does not apply if:
1. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not a protective order from domestic violence in effect or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;
2. The person or persons sought to be removed are children or grandchildren, or are otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
3. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or place of business to further an unlawful activity.
D. A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
E. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle of another person, or a place of business is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
F. A person who uses force, as permitted pursuant to the provisions of subsections B and D of this section, is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes charging or prosecuting the defendant.
G. A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force, but the law enforcement agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
H. The court shall award reasonable attorney fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection F of this section.
I. The provisions of this section and the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, Sections 1290.1 through 1290.26 of this title, shall not be construed to require any person using a pistol pursuant to the provisions of this section to be licensed in any manner.
J. As used in this section:
1. “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people;
2. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest; and
3. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2011.
COMMITTEE REPORT BY: COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY, dated 02/15/2011 - DO PASS, As Amended and Coauthored.

[MikeD4386]

I hope you personally can be persuaded to shoot yourself in the head.

Well this is a classic thought experiment.

The excersize goes: if you were a nazi and they told you to murder someone or be killed, would you do it?

People operating beyond a juvenile level of moral development will say no.

you are saying you would kill someone instead of having your TV stolen.


thats all im saying

[NinjaKix]

I would not stand behind the soor with my gun aimed at head level waited for the door to creek open so I can kill someone.

I know everyone in the misc has JD from harvard but you still have to act with reasonable discretion. You guys who is saying she is going to get off easily are sadly mistaken. this will absolutely go to trial

Oh lawd, the troll is strong in you.

[MikeD4386]

No DA in their right mind will prosecute a young, recently widowed mother who was protecting her INFANT.... especially in OK.

you dont seem to have even the remotest intuition of basica legal practices.

if 2 people are shot in the face in someone's house, it will not be left to a simple investigation by a police sargeant

[A1lthatrema1ns]

stark difference from a bay area "liberal"

west oakland, fuuuarrrkkkkk.....hate passing thru there on bart, let alone driving. there are bullet holes in the bathrooms there. never anything good on the news about oakland, its always another homicide every week.

[Leon09]

woodwife

[deadbycheese]

A lawless hyperviolent society does not contribute to the "greater good" . which books have you read on political philosophy, the Grand theft auto instruction manual?

Really? you dont think a thief gets a second chance? You want 18 year old kids who get drunk and shop lift to get the death penalty.

Strong preconventional level of moral developement.jpg

Your analogy is horrible. The punishments are being given out by the people in danger in self-defense, the justice system was never in danger.

[MJND]

A lawless hyperviolent society does not contribute to the "greater good" . which books have you read on political philosophy, the Grand theft auto instruction manual?

Really? you dont think a thief gets a second chance? You want 18 year old kids who get drunk and shop lift to get the death penalty.

Strong preconventional level of moral developement.jpg

18 year old shoplifter aren't directly threatening anyones life. This home invader was.

Other problems with shooting at the leg:

It's a smaller, harder to hit target

It is probably moving much more dynamically than the center of someone's body, making it harder to hit

Shooting someone in the leg does not necessarily incapacitate them and prevent them from shooting or stabbing you


You use deadly force in a situation that you feel you are truly in danger of great bodily harm or death. In that sort of situation I want to put the odds in my favor as much as possible, which means trying to stop the threat as effectively as possible, which rules out leg shots.

x2

this will absolutely go to trial

Did you even watch the video? The police already said the shooting was justified. They are not pursuing any charges.

[AntiGlobalist]

Well this is a classic thought experiment.

The excersize goes: if you were a nazi and they told you to murder someone or be killed, would you do it?

People operating beyond a juvenile level of moral development will say no.

you are saying you would kill someone instead of having your TV stolen.


thats all im saying

Hey guys look MikeD is a psychic and knows the intentions of all home invaders. Don't worry they just want to steal your TV.

[MikeD4386]

how can people defend the burglar's, if you want to break into someones house and break the law and steal peoples **** they worked hard for you deserve to die, why do we need people like this in society.

ok, IM glad someone explicitly stated this.

All I am saying (and again, I cant believe everyone is getting so ****ing mad, its almost like no one in this threead has eveer engaged in a metacognitive debate of theoretical justice or basic thought principles) is that someone does not DESERVE to die for breaking into someone's house

[MikeD4386]

18 year old shoplifter aren't directly threatening anyones life. This home invader was.


.

you're going to have to draw the line somewhere.

[Mephisto91]

I think it was excessive but I support her decision still. She could have blown off his leg or something, going straight for the kill really says something about the kind of person she is. Regardless, if criminals got shot in the face more often crime rates would plummet.

[MJND]

Well this is a classic thought experiment.

The excersize goes: if you were a nazi and they told you to murder someone or be killed, would you do it?

People operating beyond a juvenile level of moral development will say no.

you are saying you would kill someone instead of having your TV stolen.


thats all im saying

Yes. A Nazi killing a 100% innocent person = a mother killing a burglar who broke into her home with a knife.

MAKES PERFECT SENSE!!!

[mrawdtsi]

you dont seem to have even the remotest intuition of basica legal practices.

if 2 people are shot in the face in someone's house, it will not be left to a simple investigation by a police sargeant

Oklahoma HB1439.

read it, you clown.

1 person was shot, the other turned themselves in.

you must be some pre-law student who all of a sudden thinks they know the law, as it pertains to states he does not reside in.

i truly hope you never breed.

[MJND]

I think it was excessive but I support her decision still. She could have blown off his leg or something, going straight for the kill really says something about the kind of person she is. Regardless, if criminals got shot in the face more often crime rates would plummet.

lol, if she blew his leg off he would have died within a minute.

Dat dere major artery.

[sizeNstrength]

A lawless hyperviolent society does not contribute to the "greater good" . which books have you read on political philosophy, the Grand theft auto instruction manual?

Really? you dont think a thief gets a second chance? You want 18 year old kids who get drunk and shop lift to get the death penalty.

Strong preconventional level of moral developement.jpg

The law is do not break into someones house and try to steal, rape, kill, and destroy.

The law is NOT do not defend yourself by any means possible.

It is completely unreasonable for someone to balk defending their own or their family's lives when faced with an intruder who forces their way into your home. Relinquishing the power of the situation to the intruder puts the situation's fate in the hands of the one committing a crime and takes it away from the law-abiding citizens.

I certainly never want to kill anyone, but it would take one hell of an idiot to let the intruder make all the decisions if and when you have the ability to defend yourself. To ME, MY life is more important than the intruder. My family's lives are more important than the intruder. You do not gamble in that situation. I would pull the trigger too.

You can not expect the person who the crime is being committed against to think 100% clearly and to give the infiltrator the benefit of the doubt. It is NOT the homeowner's fault that they are being attacked. And make no mistake... it is an attack. If a country invades another country - its war. This is the same damn thing.

[Steak_n_Taters]

Hey guys look MikeD is a psychic and knows the intentions of all home invaders. Don't worry they just want to steal your TV.

Well duh just ask them what they want first. Just because they are criminals doesn't mean they're liars.

[AFSFK]

[SCE]

Good.

[MikeD4386]

I apologize to everyone who I may have offended. I should not have engaged the low IQ society of the world with an exploratory expedition of canonical ethics.

my aopologies. I hope negging me makes up for the cognitive void you all have that was created when your cerebral cognitive experienced arrested developedment from the ages of 12-16

[MJND]

you're going to have to draw the line somewhere.

The line is already drawn you stupid fuk.

The law says if you reasonably believe that you are at risk of seriously bodily injury or death, then you can you deadly force.

[delsoco7]

would wife (srs)

[Tyler44]

A lawless hyperviolent society does not contribute to the "greater good" . which books have you read on political philosophy, the Grand theft auto instruction manual?

Really? you dont think a thief gets a second chance? You want 18 year old kids who get drunk and shop lift to get the death penalty.

Strong preconventional level of moral developement.jpg

When did we begin talking about Walmart shoplifters? I used the term thief referring to a burglar. A person who forces entry into your locked home with a knife does not deserve the benefit of the doubt nor a chance to explain themselves. That action alone is a threat towards you and your families lives and appropriate action should be taken to protect yourself and family. If someone threats my life, family and home by forcing entry with a deadly weapon, I will take their life without hesitation and I would hope my neighbors, friends and family would act in a similar fashion.

Lawless hyperviolent society? What have you been smoking? This is personal protection, from a hyperviolent intruder in YOUR home.