Got what he deserved ??

[No_0ne]

His first mistake was being anywhere remotely near where alligators can eat your butt, like Florida ...

[Ski]

Perhaps the alligator was in fear for its life. On a serious note, the guy didn't deserve to die for burglary.

[jpx2rk]

Gator felt threatened, reacted, and paid the ultimate price for protecting his home.  The burglar probably had a long rap sheet (assumption), as he called his GF telling her what he was going to do.  He will not be missed but by a few people.

[BigK]

Anyone who would take what another person worked hard to earn gets no sympathy from me. I may not take that as far as to extend the death penalty to include larceny, but I recognize karma when I sees it.

[duncan1371]

My take on it is why do I need to show compassion for anyone that is trying to take the preverbial food out of my kids mouth. They didn't work for it. This will be purely speculation, bit I would go as far to say they have never worked for anything. Hence being in someone else's house. You get no compassion when you did the risk matrix in your head before trying to steal anything the risk for all of those includes the chance to die. And as for those that say you have the presumption that imenent threat is there but you can change that based on the situation.

Well the situation is that you are in my house at night and I will offer you no chance to dupe me.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[monkeylizard]

And as for those that say you have the presumption that imenent threat is there but you can change that based on the situation.

 

I wasn't expressing my opinion on the matter. That's what the law in TN says. Disagree at your own peril.

[Hozzie]

If the penalty for burglary was death, I bet we would have a lot less burglaries.  I am sick and tired of excuses for people.  I did some stupid things as a kid, but never would I consider stealing from someone.   Especially go into another's home to do it.  

 

My screw ups had more probability to hurt myself than anyone else.  Big difference.

 

No lost sleep here.

[duncan1371]

I wasn't expressing my opinion on the matter. That's what the law in TN says. Disagree at your own peril.

If I have the presumption of the threat and I dispose of the threat there is no peril. :-\ YMMV

Sent from my HUAWEI Y536A1 using Tapatalk

[monkeylizard]

Unless that presumption of fear of a threat to life can be proven to have not existed.

 

It's why you can't capture someone in your home, tie them up, and execute them. A person in your home is not a carte blanche pass to do with them as you please. You're simply presumed to have been in fear of your life. But the law says the facts can prove otherwise.

 

And no....your mileage won't vary. That's what the law says. That's how the cops will see it. That's how the DA will see it. That's how the judge will see it.

Edited December 10, 2015 by monkeylizard

[Motasyco]

I have no sympathy for a burglar.  If you've ever been the victim of a burglary, it takes a long time, if ever, to get over the feeling of violation.  Perhaps death is a harsh penalty but I think the loss of a hand would be quite fitting.  The gator just got a little carried away.

[conn_air7]

Recap: 22 year old man is caught burglarizing, gator takes control of the situation by neutralizing the threat, and the state euthanizes the Gator for being a good civilian. Who is the real winner?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[E4 No More]

Unless that presumption of fear of a threat to life can be proven to have not existed.

 

It's why you can't capture someone in your home, tie them, and execute them. A person in your home is not a carte blanche pass to with them as you please. You're simply presumed to have been in fear of your life. But the law says the facts can prove otherwise.

I think that you should note that in one of the "training" videos in my HCP class, (which I assume everyone with a HCP had to view), the resident came home to the burglar in his house. Not only could they have backed out of the doorway, they were shown shooting the burglar as he was turning to flee. Yes, we have stand your ground: however, being shot in the back would prove no threat to exist, no?

[Omega]

I think that you should note that in one of the "training" videos in my HCP class, (which I assume everyone with a HCP had to view), the resident came home to the burglar in his house. Not only could they have backed out of the doorway, they were shown shooting the burglar as he was turning to flee. Yes, we have stand your ground: however, being shot in the back would prove no threat to exist, no?

No, the entrance wound does not mean no threat exists.  Someone can fire at you then turn away, or fire at you when he is trying to escape.  The circumstances surrounding the shooting, and any relationship with the target may lead to a determination of a bad shoot but the shot placement in and of itself is not the determining factor.

[monkeylizard]

being shot in the back would prove no threat to exist, no?

 

Each incident would be unique and have its own factors. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it would "prove" that no imminent threat to life existed, but it certainly wouldn't look good for the homeowner. Other factors could come in to play such as if the burglar was turning away to reach for something.

 

 

ETA - crosspost

Edited December 10, 2015 by monkeylizard

[E4 No More]

Each incident would be unique and have its own factors. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it would "prove" that no imminent threat to life existed, but it certainly wouldn't look good for the homeowner. Other factors could come in to play such as if the burglar was turning away to reach for something.

 

 

ETA - crosspost

Turning to grab something like a weapon was NOT a part of that video that I saw. The message conveyed was that if someone comes into your home uninvited then it was a justified shooting.

[E4 No More]

No, the entrance wound does not mean no threat exists.  Someone can fire at you then turn away, or fire at you when he is trying to escape.  The circumstances surrounding the shooting, and any relationship with the target may lead to a determination of a bad shoot but the shot placement in and of itself is not the determining factor.

Yet the burglar in the video was unarmed, IIRC.

[monkeylizard]

Turning to grab something like a weapon was NOT a part of that video that I saw. The message conveyed was that if someone comes into your home uninvited then it was a justified shooting.

 

Then that's wrong. The HCP material is generally out of date and poorly produced to begin with, unless they've made new stuff since I took my class. A good instructor will show the video as required, but also correct the common misconceptions that those lousy videos can give.

Edited December 10, 2015 by monkeylizard

[E4 No More]

Then that's wrong. The HCP material is generally out of date and poorly produced to begin with, unless they've made new stuff since I took my class. A good instructor will show the video as required, but also correct the common misconceptions that those lousy videos can give.

Do not the instructors have to be certified to be instructors? There's really no independent interpretation of the law...unless you're a corrupt judge of which our society appears to have many.

[monkeylizard]

Yes, they do. I suspect the minimum requirement is to show the videos. I highly doubt the video expressly says "If there's a person in your house uninvited, you can shoot them, no questions asked." But a good instructor will recognize that the video can leave that impression and will work to correct that possible (and likely) misconception. I haven't seen the video in a long time, so I can't really speak to the specifics in whatever is being used today in classes.

Edited December 10, 2015 by monkeylizard

[K191145]

No worries, I saw a pic of the guy and he was white. Now if he had been black or hispanic I would have called for riots and protested alligator abuse and racist alligators.

 

Anyway to those defending innocent burglars, the burglars who broke into my brothers home in the spring, the day before they stabbed and shot a man in Bellevue. They really had no idea if my brother was home or not since he keeps a second vehicle there so I believe that burglars are more than prepared to murder someone if they find someone in the home they invaded. I personally am not going to ask their intention nor ask for an ID to see if they are old enough to be shot. It is my plan to shoot anyone not welcome who forces their way into my home and find out later who they are. A burglar is a potential murderer as far as i'm concerned and i'm not going to gamble my life deciding if they "DESERVE" it or not. They certainly asked for it and it is also my plan not to let it bother me too much if I have to dispatch some thug home invader, he/she did it to themselves. I somehow doubt that anyone here at TGO is going to this thugs funeral and morn. 

 

"Deserve ain't got nothing to do with it"  Clint Eastwood as William Munny: Unforgiven:

[monkeylizard]

To be clear.....I'm not defending burglars. I'm more interested in the homeowner not doing 20 years in Riverbend because the state couldn't make a decent training video for an HCP class or they got bad info from the web.

Edited December 10, 2015 by monkeylizard

[K191145]

To be clear.....I'm not defending burglars. I'm more interested in the homeowner not doing 20 years in Riverbend because the state couldn't make a decent training video for an HCP class or they got bad info from the web.

 

No but if they are inside your home you make a smart assumption they are there to murder you. If they are shot in the back they turned while you were pulling the trigger because you don't know if they are drawing a gun from their pants while their back is to you. Once they are out of the house then it may be a different story. i was pulling the trigger before they started to turn, it happened so fast that's all I remember.

[TMF]

I think that you should note that in one of the "training" videos in my HCP class, (which I assume everyone with a HCP had to view), the resident came home to the burglar in his house. Not only could they have backed out of the doorway, they were shown shooting the burglar as he was turning to flee. Yes, we have stand your ground: however, being shot in the back would prove no threat to exist, no?

Having been shot at by people running away, I don't buy for a second that an intruder with his back to me isn't a viable threat, just less accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TMF]

To be clear.....I'm not defending burglars. I'm more interested in the homeowner not doing 20 years in Riverbend because the state couldn't make a decent training video for an HCP class or they got bad info from the web.

I can get on board with that. Of course, my personal safety comes first, so I'm applying battlefield ROE. Unless their hands are up and they're actively surrendering, they are getting shot until such time as they cease to be a threat. I didn't make the choice for them to present themselves as a threat in my home, but I can choose to reduce their ability to be a threat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oh Shoot]

Turning to grab something like a weapon was NOT a part of that video that I saw. The message conveyed was that if someone comes into your home uninvited then it was a justified shooting.

 

At any point, if you can be shown to no longer have had a reasonable fear of death/serious injury, the initial presumption of that can be reversed.

 

There was a case a few years ago here where a fellow shot some burglar and then the perp made it into another room closing the door.  The guy then shot through the door some and finally opened the door and shot him some more. Charged with murder 2 I believe, dunno that I ever heard the outcome.

 

Say a perp falls to his knees and puts his hands in the air, then you go right up to him and put one in his forehead. If proven, that could certainly sting you. Or worse, Monkey's scenario as actually going as far as tying the guy up first. Or even capping off a good shoot with a final close one with the powder burns and blood splatter to indicate it, whatever.

 

Obviously, would take some pretty clear forensics or witnesses for that sort of thing to come back on you, but it could. As Monkey said, each situation can be unique in some way.

 

But his main point is valid, that the "castle law" is no more carte blanche to be judge and executioner than using deadly force anywhere else,  it's only to save your life and limb while you still had a reasonable fear of losing it. And remember that the "reasonable" part ain't ultimately your call.

 

- OS

Edited December 11, 2015 by Oh Shoot