This guy stepped over the line...

[NMB2]

when I said you get one shot I don't literally mean one bullet, I mean you get one shot to stop the threat.

It is very important to be trained, disciplined, and understand escalation of force. If for nothing other than to be a better human being.

If I had a dollar for everyone a police officer had a gun pointed at them and they were able to deescalate the situation without a shot fired I'd fawking retire. Same thing goes for being deployed. Too many people think they are Clint Eastwood.

As for "If someone breaks into your house, make sure you kill them, otherwise they'll sue you, and dead men tell no tales so the family can't come after you."

This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard, and I hear it often. How does killing someone make it so the family cannot come after you? If you murder someone you certainly will be pursued monetarily, as well as spend a good amount of time in Prison, if not the rest of your life.

[DavieD55]

Just remember folks... Posting on a public forum saying things like "They'll get dragged out in a body bag no matter what" (made up example not directed towards any particular post) will come back to haunt you should you ever get involved in a self defense shooting where the bad guy gets killed and you're on the witness stand defending yourself, maybe not criminally but in civil court at least.

Yup, If you're involved in a SD shootout you can bet your grandmamas home made apple pie they will dig into all the stuff you post on the WWW.

[Ronin13]

Yup, If you're involved in a SD shootout you can bet your grandmamas home made apple pie they will dig into all the stuff you post on the WWW.

I like the Chris Costa quote about turning the tables: "There is nothing defensive about shooting another human being." Meaning that once you decide to use deadly force, you cease to be defensive and take the fight to your adversary in order to save your own life or others.

[Whistler]

While it seems much more tame here, It got pretty heated on another board I'm on with people gloating about "if someone comes into my house they are leaving in a body bag"

Take this however you will but I have what you would consider a decent amount of trigger time, as I'm sure several others here do. Until you have been put into a situation that truly endangers your life, which this 64yr old man was not in, you will not understand the emotions that go through your head. Until you have had to take life you can't even fathom the effect that has on you. I had a hard time coping with things I did against people that were trying to kill me, and conspiring to kill me. I couldn't imagine trying to deal with killing two kids (yes age is relevant) who were unarmed.

This goes to show the lack of training, and discipline by gun owners. I don't blame the gun grabbers one bit for taking this and running with it, because it has been made clear to me by the responses over this throughout the internet that there are many other wack jobs like this that shouldn't own a firearm.

Simply killing someone because they are in your home is not acceptable, that is what we have a Judicial system for. You are not Judge Dredd. If you want your BOL and your COTUS, then you need to embrace all of it, this is not war, combat, or a 3rd world country. You get one shot to eliminate your threat, if you miss, or it doesn't kill them... that doesn't mean continue engaging them once they are no longer engaging you. The threat has been eliminated, if the outcome wasn't what you wanted, too fawking bad.

Aside from that, there is no doubt in my mind this was premeditated. Who starts randomly shooting at legs @ 1pm on Thanksgiving? It could of been anyone... family, friends, neighbor. This old man had a plan, and he executed it. What other foul play may be involved I had no doubt will come out... Innocent people don't drag bodies onto tarps, and into different rooms... wait 25hrs to call a neighbor for a lawyer and STILL didn't call the police.

Well goodness, no point in having a trial then, you've got it all figured out but I think I'll wait for more facts. While I tend to agree with what I perceive you are communicating please don't presume to tell another what goes through their head, your experience may be very different from someone else.

[DavieD55]

I like the Chris Costa quote about turning the tables: "There is nothing defensive about shooting another human being." Meaning that once you decide to use deadly force, you cease to be defensive and take the fight to your adversary in order to save your own life or others.

Makes sense.

[NMB2]

Well goodness, no point in having a trial then, you've got it all figured out but I think I'll wait for more facts. While I tend to agree with what I perceive you are communicating please don't presume to tell another what goes through their head, your experience may be very different from someone else.

No point in trial? Pretty sure I expressed the exact opposite of that.

[Aloha_Shooter]

No point in trial? Pretty sure I expressed the exact opposite of that.

Mmmmmm ... no. I'm pretty sure Whistler is referring to your statements

Until you have been put into a situation that truly endangers your life, which this 64yr old man was not in, you will not understand the emotions that go through your head.

it has been made clear to me by the responses over this throughout the internet that there are many other wack jobs like this that shouldn't own a firearm.

there is no doubt in my mind this was premeditated

which indicate you've already assessed the man's life wasn't endangered and that he premeditated a murder and further that many people shouldn't own a firearm. My initial inclination is that this guy broke the law and grotesquely exceeded "self-defense" but I am open to more information and evidence. I think Whistler is simply pointing out that you appear to have already made up your mind on the facts of the case and rendered a verdict with only the sentencing left to be done.

[NMB2]

Many people should not own firearms, including this old man, and the others that think like him. That is my opinion , and I have a right to it, just as the people that are happy he killed these criminals have a right to that opinion.

At no point was this guys life in danger, this is a fact. This isn't a "what might of happened", it is what did happen. He had the upper hand by knowing exactly where they were, at all times, and firing on unsuspecting targets who he borderline lured into his basement. Then after identifying that they were unarmed and not a threat, murdered them.

He was 100% on the offensive, those teenagers had no idea he was there based off of his own testimony and he just wanted them dead.

I drew my conclusions based off of the mans own personal testimony in his criminal complaint.

[NMB2]

I do now understand what you meant though Whistler, and I can't disagree. I can just explain my thought.

[Whistler]

Many people should not own firearms, including this old man, and the others that think like him. That is my opinion , and I have a right to it, just as the people that are happy he killed these criminals have a right to that opinion.

At no point was this guys life in danger, this is a fact. This isn't a "what might of happened", it is what did happen. He had the upper hand by knowing exactly where they were, at all times, and firing on unsuspecting targets who he borderline lured into his basement. Then after identifying that they were unarmed and not a threat, murdered them.

He was 100% on the offensive, those teenagers had no idea he was there based off of his own testimony and he just wanted them dead.

I drew my conclusions based off of the mans own personal testimony in his criminal complaint.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion, that's all this entire thread is folks sharing opinions but I think you still missed the point. All you know about this story is what has been presented in an obvious anti-gun biased article and the PDF of the complaint. It is not unusual for a suspect's statements to be paraphrased and this is not represented as a transcript of the interview or testimony. The point was you are jumping to a conclusion based on incomplete facts and extrapolating that conclusion to contend the right to own a firearm should be based on your (or anyone's) individual personal opinion. Further you ascribe motivation to support your contention with hyperbole; "Judge Dredd", "Clint Eastwood", that have no basis in fact.

Based on what is known (or thought to be known) it does appear this individual took action beyond necessary self-defense however even should that be proven it is no justification to promote restricting another otherwise law-abiding citizen's right to own a firearm, what you might do based on a layman opinion of what type of person you are.

The only reason I pointed it out at all is that it is exactly the type of knee-jerk reaction most of us rail about when it comes from the anti-gun crowd.

This goes to show the lack of training, and discipline by gun owners. I don't blame the gun grabbers one bit for taking this and running with it, because it has been made clear to me by the responses over this throughout the internet that there are many other wack jobs like this that shouldn't own a firearm.

You may be right and it may have played out just as you have described but it also may simply be how it appears at this point or it may be that it's something in between. Regardless it is no justification to go off on gun owners you don't know or weren't involved questioning their motivation, training and decision making. I'm not trying to be contentious but you have no idea of my trigger time, training, experience, where I have been or what I have had to do. Your opinion on the thread is welcome, your diatribe on who should own a gun, what training they need and their motivation less so.