Car Owner Fatally Shoots Teen During Alleged Robbery Attempt (New Orleans)

WWL-TV ^ | August 27, 2002

[VOA]

Why have we changed in our attitudes--I don't mean all of us, but Society in general?

Call me cynical, but this change in attitudes was part of a guaranteed full-employment act.

Criminals don't get shot stealing/destroying people's stuff.
Cops stay employed trying to keep the criminals in check.

The processing of these criminals for lots of property crimes keeps lots of
ancillary services humming: prison guards, medical service personnel in the
prison infirmary, all the judges, clerks, prosecutors and defense attorneys.
Oh, and probation officers.

Not to mention the manufacturers of goods that are patronized to replace lost/damaged
goods.

In a rational world, such as the biochemical study of metabolism, this would
be called a "futile cycle".
Nothing good is accomplished in all this work...and actually a lot of resources
that could be used for better purposes are "burned up".

But, I'm sure some good articles in law journals would show that all this endless
insanity is actually good for "society".

I guess I'm just a sentimental old fool when wishing for the good old days when this
sort of foolishness would be nipped in the bud with a bit of corporal punishment
of future criminals when they were in grade school (and still impressionable)...
or with the a blast of rock salt from a 12 guage at the first infraction.

[jackbill]

?He didn't have no right to kill him,? said Wanda Munoz, the victim?s mother. ?If he was doing what they said he was doing, he should have just called the police and reported it. Why kill him."

Because he was a thieving son of a B---h! And I mean that last word figuratively and literally.

[Chad Fairbanks]

or with the a blast of rock salt from a 12 guage at the first infraction

It does leave a lasting impression... ;0)

[dtel]

LOL
You too, huh?

[j.frank.dobie]

Two words: NICE SHOT!

[Chad Fairbanks]

Let's just say that when you are 15, and finally getting lucky, one of the last things you want to hear her say is, "What are all these little scars on your buttcheek?"... ;0)

[Area51]

Not ultimately. The jury is charged to apply the law. If the facts show that there was no threat of death or great bodily harm, a jury verdict of justifiable homicide will be set aside by the judge or reversed on appeal. Nothing about a jury verdict is "ultimate." 41 posted on 8/27/02 4:18 PM Pacific by Hobey Baker

As shown in the OJ trial, Juries do what they damned well like. If I ever get to sit on a trial like this in a criminal trial a hung jury or Jury Nullification will rule.It is ultimately up the "people" sitting on the jury to decide what is a reasonable law.

IMHO This man gets his rifle cartidges replaced along with a check for 5,000 dollars to save the County the cost of a trial and housing of the thief. The cost of the Cartridges should be billed to the dead perps family. The Wounded one needs 20 years of hard labor on a chain gang to think about his next bad deed. Maybe then, all his 'cousins' wouldn't think he was so cool. Instead of them being released after being chased down, arrested, booking, then released onto the streets because of lack of cell space. Only to pull a couple more off to finish off the night. Or getting his hand slapped by some limp wristed judge who cried when he heard the poor boy's life story....

If you don't want these little Bastards committing these crimes against society, teach them to respect others. If that means respect by the threat of Death then so be it. It seems to be what the streets teach them anyhow. It is evident from Momma's comments what they were doing was immaterial. It was only the results that she was pissed about.

Hey Momma Life sucks, deal with it. Teach the others in your harem another occupational trade. Evidently this one has a rising death rate.

[dtel]

I really enjoyed "The Texas Longhorns"
Oh wait, you're dead.
Nice screen name. ;^)

[Freedom4US]

I can't agree (in general) for citizen's doling out the death penalty for thievery. But I've came to the exact same conclusion -- personal property represents in a tangible sense a portion of someone's life. When property is stolen, part of the owners life is 'killed' in that sense.

[zip]

“He didn't have no right to kill him,” said Wanda Munoz, the victim’s mother
I agree with Ms Munoz 100%. "...didn't have no..." means did have a right. (double negatives and all that rot).

I can vouch for the feelings of being personally violated when some SOB steals things that I worked to obtain. If I had the opportunity to shoot, I WOULD. More power to the individuals that protect their property.

[the bottle let me down]

So if some scumbag breaks into my house and doesn't seem to be armed, and I find him in my daughter's bedroom, I don't have the right to spray his f****** brains all over the wall?

If you find a stranger in your daughter's room, standing over her bed, it is reasonable for you to shoot. If the bad guy is trying to escape out the window at the time, you're probably not ok. A fleeing perp is not a threat. If the perp is on the other side of the room from your duaghter and freezes, so that he isn't threatening you or her, you can't shoot. If you do, you'll have to explain why you thought he was a threat. Realistically, as long as you don't shoot the perp in the back, shooting a stranger who broke into your house will probably not lead to prosecution.

I'd note that in some jurisdicitions, there is a duty to retreat. For example, if you're on your porch and someone threatens you, in some states you have a duty to retreat inside your house, if you can do so safely. As far as I know, no state has held that there is a duty to retreat from one's house. Britain, however, has started down this road.

As far as using lethal force to defend property, state laws vary, so check carefully before you do anything.

[Freedom4US]

Correct me if I'm wrong , but I think I read somewhere that in the old West, horse theft was a capital offense. Thanks.

Absolutely. Just how valuable a horse was out there isn't understood anymore. Having your horse stolen meant probable death in lot of circumstances. In general, theft of any kind was dealt with quite severely -- primarily because there wasn't any effective way to lock anything up. Locks only keep honest people honest, anyway. Since everything was wide open and laying around for the taking, you can guess how thieves were dealt with.

[BlazingArizona]

Standing off at a safe distance and shooting a thief who poses no immediate threat to your person or to anyone else is NOT justifiable homicide. I'm a gun owner and a great believer in self-defense, but this ain't it.

Let me guess: Massachusetts? New York?

[PatrioticAmerican]

I desire a shoot-to-kill property law. Hanging horse thieves tends to stop horse stealing.

[VA Advogado]

Oh, probably because the police would have shown up 10 minutes late, his car would have been destroyed and the perps wouldn't have been caught.

Momma wanted that new Pioneer radio. Thats what she wanted.

[FatherTorque]

I desire a shoot-to-kill property law.

Move to Texas then. Texas state law says that you may use deadly force to prevent the theft of your tangible, moveable property. Anytime day or night.

That's straight from the CCW class.

[VA Advogado]

Correct me if I'm wrong , but I think I read somewhere that in the old West, horse theft was a capital offense. Thanks.

And I think the bible covers an ox theft with a stoning.

[VA Advogado]

Well maybe he can argue that he was aiming for the leg. I would have done that, because I believe that someone trying to steal my property deserves pain before death.

I speak from personal experience, there's nothing like the sound of a shattering knee cap and the resulting scream to dear God. :)

[Freedom4US]

Years ago, after a relative died, in those days the street address of all parties involved was listed in the newspaper obituary. Since the funeral was out of state, criminals used our probable absence to ransack our house.

My Grandmother, who was too old to attend, also reported several 'hang up' phone calls, so the perps also had their grubby designs on her house.

Had I the means to do so at the time, I would have killed them. In fact, probably today. I'm not proud of this, exactly -- but the world would be a better place without such people, no question about it.

[joesnuffy]

Would a thief be more likely to steal in a neighborhood where the victims are allowed to fight back...or one in which thieves are protected by a law that says victims cant fight back..or are hobbled in how they can ...