Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man Who Shot, Killed Thief Charged
theindychannel.com ^ | 04/16/2010 | Staff

Posted on 04/16/2010 5:35:48 PM PDT by Abathar

INDIANAPOLIS -- A man who shot and killed a teenager who broke into his car was charged Friday with voluntary manslaughter.

Virgil Lucas, 17, was found dead of a gunshot wound to the chest on the front porch of a home in the 3500 block of East Morris Street early on April 9.

James Ingram, 30, who lives nearby, told police he returned home from work to find the teen breaking into his car, and confronted him with a gun.

Ingram's attorney said his client was merely attempting to hold Lucas for the police, but when the teen ran, Ingram fired several shots after him.

Ingram told police he didn't think he'd hit the teen until he was found dead in the neighborhood.

Police said that legally, loss of property is not enough to justify the use of deadly force.

(Excerpt) Read more at theindychannel.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: Abathar

Castle Doctrine needs to be nationwide whereever someone is.

Property needs to be included as well nationwide.

The deck needs to be stacked with the victim not the criminal.


41 posted on 04/16/2010 6:43:12 PM PDT by School of Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dominic flandry
Just remember that next time he WILL bring a gun and some of his friends who have guns WILL bring theirs and they just won’t rob you, they will kill you.

Common criminals are cowards, they already know I am armed, so I doubt they would come back for a second chance at robbing an armed man.

Sorry, but most teenagers aren't hard core criminals who would come back for a revenge killing.

That's the chance I'd take before shooting an unarmed teenage running away from me

42 posted on 04/16/2010 6:49:46 PM PDT by Popman (Balsa wood: Obama Presidential timber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BnBlFlag

Yes, it is legal here in Texas, as you say, to use deadly force to protect your property, if you catch the perps actually committing the crime.(can’t go find ‘em later, shoot ‘em and get stuff back) and I don’t know about shooting them in the back. Seems like I read it has to be at night before you can do that?


43 posted on 04/16/2010 6:51:09 PM PDT by Quickgun (As a former fetus, I'm opposed to abortion. Mamas don't let your cowboys grow up to be babies..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
What kind of idiocy is this? This is practically an incentive to steal stuff. I'd give this guy a medal. Had he not been persecuted, he would have saved the taxpayers tons of money.

Hopefully the jury will act with more sanity than law enforcement.

The jury in most states, I suppose, would have no choice. I suspect most states hold that one can only use deadly force if being attacked and feared for his life and/or grievous bodily harm.

44 posted on 04/16/2010 6:55:45 PM PDT by OldPossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Abathar

I am of mixed minds about this.

It is never a good idea to think that a gun gives you control over a situation, because it does not. In fact, it reduces your control to just four things: put your gun back in your holster, pistol whip someone, fire a warning shot, or shoot them.

For a lot of situations, these are not enough options, which is why police really like Tasers.

In this case, the gun owner felt he had control, which in his mind reduced his choice to shoot or don’t shoot. When the thief darted away, it was an almost instinctual response to fire at him.

If at all possible, it is good to suggest to yourself that if you draw your gun, try to get a long blunt object in your other hand. Doing so gives you *more* control, because you have more options at close quarters.

And this last bit is critical. If you have a gun, you should avoid getting too close to an opponent. It is best if you stay 10-15 feet away, which is still “point blank range”, but any closer, and he might be inclined to try and rush you.

If you need to approach him, do so with the blunt object ahead and the gun back, well away from him.


45 posted on 04/16/2010 6:57:44 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John D

Sorry but a terrorist wants to kill me. So does someone who has a weapon who enters my home. But if someone is unarmed
he is still a criminal if he enters my home but then again
i´m, not willing to kill someone as long he/she is no treath to my live. And fact is when i point a gun to your head and you are running away then you are no danger to my life. Full stop! Does this mean that i don´t care? Well definitely no. But does this mean that i´m not willing to kill for this then yes. Just a question have you killed someone? I have and it haunts me. (but this was even my opinnion before this did happen) so nothing changed. I would never kill someone as long as my life is not in danger only because the law says i might be legal able to do this. (btw. before you get me wrong the people i have killed have been in afghanistan and i thought my life would have been in danger).


46 posted on 04/16/2010 7:00:13 PM PDT by darkside321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AussieJoe

Try reading the second sentence.
He was shot in the chest.


47 posted on 04/16/2010 7:02:03 PM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
Police said that legally, loss of property is not enough to justify the use of deadly force.

Glad I don't live in that state.

It is in Texas.

48 posted on 04/16/2010 7:07:54 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ApplegateRanch
...and THAT is the problem with living in densely populated areas: no room to quietly SOS.

SSS: Shoot, Shovel, and Shut up.

49 posted on 04/16/2010 7:08:08 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Dissent is Racism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw Woman

No, I didn’t hear about it until that night...didn’t realize anything had happened...and even then I wasn’t sure where it had happened...but then a few days after there were protests and marches over by his house...then HIS neighbors complained and got something or some law passed to keep the protestors out of their neighborhood....it was a win for gun owners, anti-illegal immigration, and a stab at the race baiters all in one....


50 posted on 04/16/2010 7:10:29 PM PDT by DrewsMum (Am I the only one that forgets I'm not on FB & tries to "like" freeper comments?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw Woman
Did you hear about that or what happened to the guy?

If you mean the guy in Houston who did cleanup with a shotgun, while an unmarked police car sat right out on the street?

The grand jury returned a "no bill". Meaning that they found no crime had been committed. Just lawful use of deadly force.

Local race baiter tried to make something of it, until he found out the perps were not Blacks, but rather illegal aliens from central America. ;)

51 posted on 04/16/2010 7:11:32 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DrewsMum; El Gato
I love justice & happy endings
52 posted on 04/16/2010 7:15:59 PM PDT by Outlaw Woman (Control the American people? Herding cats would be easier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot
Don't worry, after your use of harsh language while he's running away, he'll reform and never steal again.

So, Joe kid, age 11 comes onto your yard (obviously to steal your son's bike), you chase after him and shoot him in the back two blocks from your home?

53 posted on 04/16/2010 7:23:32 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Abathar
Too bad he didn't live in Texas.

That nice, the story indicated 17 year old was running away. That would seem to indicate he was possibly shot in the back.

54 posted on 04/16/2010 7:31:31 PM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AussieJoe

I believe I agree with you. I don’t see theft as a death penalty offense.

I understand the anger of the victim, believe me, but there are degrees of crime.

Save the death penalty for murderers and violent rapists and child rapists, IMO.


55 posted on 04/16/2010 7:31:57 PM PDT by Marie2 (Ask yourself: "What does the Left want me to do?" Then go do the opposite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
So, Joe kid, age 11

11-Year-Old Killed Father's Girlfriend

11-year-old killer walks free at 20

56 posted on 04/16/2010 7:36:56 PM PDT by Navy Patriot (Sarah and the Conservatives will rock your world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Actually, no. Cops are very restricted in the occasions when they can use deadly force. A non violent crime and an suspect who runs does not justify deadly force.


57 posted on 04/16/2010 7:40:36 PM PDT by sig226 (Mourn this day, the death of a great republic. March 21, 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot

You didn’t answer the question?


58 posted on 04/16/2010 7:41:39 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: OldPossum
The jury in most states, I suppose, would have no choice.

Of course it does. Jury nullification is always an option.

59 posted on 04/16/2010 7:42:02 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AussieJoe
Shooting him to stop him breaking in, stealing, or harming someone - yes, absolutely, but shooting him in the back while he’s unarmed and running away

Shooting some stupid punk in the back for steeling CD's or something out of my car? No way I'd do that. I'd like to, but there is no way would I shoot someone in the back for this type of crime.

To be honest, without perceived or direct physical threat to me or someone else, I'm not shooting. Now catching someone that has entered or are attempting entry to my home is an entirely different story.

60 posted on 04/16/2010 7:46:29 PM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson