Posted on 11/09/2007 9:21:36 AM PST by SergeiRachmaninov
Selma — An intruder who police say was pinned between a car and a fence has died at the hospital.
John Reid said he pulled into his driveway near the intersection of Hawkins Road and U.S. Highway 301 between Micro and Selma Thursday afternoon when he noticed two men getting into a brown sedan outside a gate on his property.
Reid, whose property had been burglarized several times in the past year, said he did not want the pair to escape.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
From the aerial video, it is clear these guys where still on the property by quite a bit. The damage to the car and truck are minimal. He says he hit them hard, but it doesn’t look that way.
One question, does the definition of "home" or "residence" include the property surrounding the home and out buildings?
POST HOLE DIGGERS?.....lol!!!.................
Thief was caught breaking OUT. Same thing.
Don’t play word games.
The guy was a criminal. He broke into the property, took something, placed it in his car and tried to run.
He was unfortunate enough to try to run and chose the wrong direction.
You know, when someone on the left starts “connecting the dots” it’s always a “Well, did you know this?” to try to misdirect an adversary with whom he is arguing, but when something is so “cut-and-dried” as you’re trying to make this out, the attempt is ALWAYS to keep to the “facts” as the leftist sees them.
Instead of ignoring the REST of the facts in the video and the news article, stop trying to rely on one thing. “That’s not what happened here”.
Yes, it is. The crook didn’t get away with the crime THIS time. It’s exactly what will come out. The materials stolen will be found to have been taken from THE PROPERTY of the owner, and was now in someone else’s vehicle, and the owner of said vehicle was TRYING TO FLEE.
Nothing is going to happen to Mr. Reid, contrary to your bad wishes for him.
Bad idea. Not only because I don't went to be shot for cutting across a neighbor's lawn, but because someone at the edge of your property is also at the edge of someone else's. You've got to consider not just who you're shooting at, but what's behind him.
Personally, I’m in favor of having the interruption of the commission of a major felony be an absolute defense against a homicide charge. But that’s not the way the law reads now.
BTW, those of you who think the driver in this case is fully justified are in conflict with the law in all states (with the possible exception of Texas) as well as God’s law, as laid down in the Law of Moses, and old English Common Law, the foundation of our legal system.
You have every right to disagree with all these codes of law, of course, but you should be aware that you are disagreeing.
Side note 1: If you are going to kill someone for taking your property, is there a lower limit on the value of the property you will kill to protect? $10,000? $100? $1?
Side note 2: Is is possible that the perps in this case could have been innocent? Perhaps they could have been lost and have entered the wrong property because they were following bad directions, then were leaving when they found out their mistake. This has happened to me when trying to find a home out in the country. Would your opinion of the rightness or wrongness of his actions be modified if he had killed a non-thief?
They came at him with deadly force, so I would think he couldn’t be charged with deadly force trying to protect himself. The guy should have first said he was in fear of his life since a car was speeding at him. He tried to miss being killed by the car and succeeded but it didn’t work out well for the other guy. So, he saved his own life.
Ohioman is absolutely right. If this had been a COP involved, and the man was accidentally pinned, end of case. How MANY times have you seen this VERY thing on damned “real time cop shows”????
Don’t give me any lip about “Well, he wasn’t a cop”. No he was a LEGAL citizen, owner of the property on which the incident took place, didn’t INVITE the guests there to put them in the position, and he took action to stop a fleeing felon.
Plain and simple.
He said exactly the right thing publicly: “As Brown tried to scramble out of the car and run, Reid said, he hit the gas pedal by mistake.”
What if you live in the country with no neighbors within shotgun’s reach and a criminal is going into your house, grabbing stuff, carting it to the yard, going back inside.
What if he is in your yard, armed, heading toward a window?
I wouldn’t shoot someone in my yard if there were a house behind him unless he had a bead on me and I had no other protection or defense. But if someone armed were coming through my yard toward my house, I’d drop him. I shouldn’t have to wait until he intrudes and has me or loved ones at point-blank range.
That said, giving the people the freedom to defend their homes to this extent would cut down on crime, as it always has in the past. The more you restrict the homeowner, the higher the crime rate and the higher rate of homeowners being killed.
Not even close to the same thing. Someone running at you is a threat. Someone running away is not. Even if he's carrying your stuff.
The materials stolen will be found to have been taken from THE PROPERTY of the owner, and was now in someone else’s vehicle, and the owner of said vehicle was TRYING TO FLEE.
If a defense lawyer made that argument, he'd be doing the prosecution's job.
Nothing is going to happen to Mr. Reid, contrary to your bad wishes for him.
I have no bad wishes for Mr. Reid. I'm talking about what the law says.
Exodus 22:3: “But if it happens after sunrise, he is guilty of murder.”
Under the Law, a owner protecting his home against a nighttime break-in was allowed to use deadly force, as in a pre-electric light era he would be unable to determine the intent or identity of the intruder. During the day, deadly force was considered murder.
I do have a doctorate in Philanthropy, though I've never been able to use it, due to a lack of money.
Sheriff Bizzell certainly gets my vote in the next election.
You just hit the record for the number of bullshits used on a post. LOL.
What exactly would be the charge, if they don't mention the stolen property? Involuntary manslaughter? You could hardly prove murder, if the people were not acquainted. Tell a jury someone was killed by the car of another, the jury is gonna presume "accident" in the absence of motive.
Yes it is!
Those who support these thugs have turned the question around.
Now people ask "Is it worth killing someone to protect your property?"
The right question to ask is, "Is taking your property worth risking my life?"
Lethal force can’t be used to protect property, I think, because the punishment isn’t proportionate to the crime. Having my car stolen, for instance, would be a huge crime against me, I could lose my livelihood and etc., but, it wouldn’t KILL me.
Myself I favor double, triple, quadruple restitution as per the Bible. Far more just.
Amen, Brother!
Swift & consistent offing of perps in process (including fleeing) will cause these things to cease among you, even if for no other reason than a shortage of perps.
My dad used to tell a story of him & 'the wrong crowd' he got mixedup with, taking a late night, barefooted run through a stubble field, after getting caught in a watermelon patch, by a shotgun toting, irate farmer.
Don't know if the farmer really fired at them, or just into the air, but that was the last of Dad's watermelon capers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.