Oklahoma mom shoots and kills intruder

[Saltyk]

I said nothing about the victims, didn't mention that. I simply said that criminals aren't bad people and don't deserve to die or live in prison for the rest of their life.

...........

criminals aren't bad people

buddy....have you ever heard of people like Ed Gien, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and John Wayne Gacy?

The fact that people like those 4 existed in this world removes anything valid from that sentence.

Let us look at Jeffrey Dahmer, the man was diagnosed with several mental illnesses (I think it was a form in psychosis to be specific).

They're pretty sure Ted Bundy had bipolar or something along those lines

Ed Gein was abused in childhood and was raised to think that all women were prostitutes

John Wayne Gacy was molested and abused in childhood

These aren't people who are commiting crime because they're soulless bastards, they commit the crime because of their own serious problems, problems that prison should try to address.

Those are mere explanations for what they did. Not excuses. They should still be made accountable for their actions. No matter what the reasons, when you break the law, you should be punished. This is why justice is said to be blind. Justice doesn't care why you killed people, had sex with the dead bodies, and then ate them. It just cares that you did. Jeffery Dahmer, in case you forgot.

 

[orangeban]

I said nothing about the victims, didn't mention that. I simply said that criminals aren't bad people and don't deserve to die or live in prison for the rest of their life.

...........

criminals aren't bad people

buddy....have you ever heard of people like Ed Gien, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and John Wayne Gacy?

The fact that people like those 4 existed in this world removes anything valid from that sentence.

Let us look at Jeffrey Dahmer, the man was diagnosed with several mental illnesses (I think it was a form in psychosis to be specific).

They're pretty sure Ted Bundy had bipolar or something along those lines

Ed Gein was abused in childhood and was raised to think that all women were prostitutes

John Wayne Gacy was molested and abused in childhood

These aren't people who are commiting crime because they're soulless bastards, they commit the crime because of their own serious problems, problems that prison should try to address.

Those are mere explanations for what they did. Not excuses. They should still be made accountable for their actions. No matter what the reasons, when you break the law, you should be punished. This is why justice is said to be blind. Justice doesn't care why you killed people, had sex with the dead bodies, and then ate them. It just cares that you did. Jeffery Dahmer, in case you forgot.

Then justice is wrong. That seems like a lame argument I know, but it's what I think.

 

[Thyunda]

Easily justified. The burglars knew full well that they were operating outside the rules of society when they broke into her house with a knife. Clearly the police had no intention of showing up anytime soon, and she had a baby to protect. What happened to the old saying, "Don't aim your weapon unless you intend to use it"?
If she'd have fired a warning shot, one of two things would have happened.

#1. The burglars decide it's not worth getting shot over, and run away and never bother her again.
#2. The burglars decide to continue their charge and now they're angry about being shot at. Or they leave and decide to punish her and her child with a petrol bomb through the window or another home invasion when the baby's with a sitter, and the gun-toting mother isn't around.

In short, warning shots don't work. It's the equivalent of showing your poker opponents your hand. She shot one of them, the other one knows she's not to be fucked with. She's not just waving a gun around for show, she knows how to use the thing.

I hope I'm making sense.

You don't fire warning shots. That's illegal and only happen in the movies. Bullets don't magically disappear when fired. It has to hit something hard enough to stop it. God forbid the warning shot hit a kid walking down the street.

If you tell the police officer in the USA that you intentionally fire warning shots you will open the door for prosecution and/or civil lawsuits. Why? When you fire a warning shot it tells the judge that you do not think the person is a threat and hence you have no legal standing to used your firearms.

You do not pull a gun on someone unless you intend to kill them. That's the hard brutal truth of it.

Well, I did not know that, being English myself, but thank you for providing me with a little more grounding for my argument.

When you go to a firearms or defensive training school, the teacher will either directly or indirectly tell you to kill the criminal in your home.

The reasons are dead criminal(s) can't talk in court. That means the prosecutor have only one thing to relies on, the scene of the shooting which is in your own home. It's now you vs. the dead guy in your living room instead of you vs. the criminal in court. The second reason is dead criminals won't be able to file civil lawsuits.

There are states that have the Castle doctrine where you are allow to kill home invaders without prosecution and immune to civil lawsuits. The Castle doctrine depending on the states will allow you to stand your ground and kill the SOB in your property on the spot. No running, hiding, or any BS. Just take your gun out and kill the SOB.

Oklahoma has adopted the Castle Doctrine, however I haven't read into it. So the young lady will not be prosecuted. In my book she is a heroin.

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=69782

Thank you again. Heroine, by the way. Heroin is a drug.

 

[Ragnarok185]

The intruders should never had invaded her home in the first place. This is completely justified, I would have done the same thing in her shoes.

 

[salinv]

You know what I find shocking about this article though?

What the fuck took the cops so long?! Seriously, 21 minutes and she still had to deal with them herself?! What the fuck?

From the way I heard about it a few days ago, she lives in the most awkward of places in respect to jurisdiction, so the call actually bounced around a couple times between departments before the police figured it out. Still unforgivable though.

Ah, gotta love bureaucracy...

... but not Shotgungs, why would anyone need a gun for self defence stronger than a simple 9mm?

Its actually easier to legally own a shotgun over a pistol since you can't easily conceal a shotgun. Lower age restriction, no special concealed carry license..

The annoying thing is how follow up stories say the mom won't have charges pressed against her, like they're doing her a favor.

Well, she murdered someone. How is it not unusual to press charges for murder?

That murder is legal in the US whenever someone walks onto your lawn is a different story, but at least that is still being regarded as 'crime untill otherwise'.

Anyway, there's a world of difference hidden in that story that Yahoo doesn't tell us. 'as they enter the home' could've been anything from opening a door while intending to try and steal a few dollars worth of stuff, to being an actual threat.

Obviously, since I have morals, I don't approve of murdering someone who wants to steal $ 10. We had the medieval ages where they did stuff like that, it didn't work. And since it's unclear if the burglars were any dangers, I can't call this justified.

But judging as the first thing the murderer did was run for firearms, and the first question to the dispatcher was if it was okay to murder that guy, I'm betting she's a gun nut who opened fire the moment they stepped inside.

That's murder, no matter how much a pro-violence gun nut wants to twist the story. Someone's not a threat by opening a door.

First off, this has nothing to do with being in the US, it is because Oklahoma has a "make my day" law; if someone is trespassing on your personal property (or maybe just your house, I don't remember), the homeowner has every legal right to use lethal force. The authorities aren't "doing her a favor," they literally couldn't stick a murder charge on her if she was trapped in a glue factory.

From the way I heard the story, the two trespassers had been casing her home for at least two hours. The "murderer's" husband just died of cancer (during Christmas), and the trespassers believed she had leftover cancer medication. This was in a smaller town, a place where everyone knew everyone, as such the cancer was more common knowledge. She dialed 911 when she noticed they were there, and asked if it was alright for her to defend herself in the case they assaulted her. When the trespassers finally trespassed/entered her mobile home while being armed with a deadly weapon, she used a shotgun to defend her baby and herself against the assault, shooting one and scaring the living daylights out of the other. In this case it was her legal and ethical right to do so.

While saying what could have happened if she did not defend herself would be just speculation, and killing of another human being is appalling, but it is honestly better than what could have been the alternative. It was two on one, and she was preoccupied with defending her child. I doubt that this could have possibly ended well, or even much better. However, when someone goes out of their way to harm another human being, NO ONE should go out of their way or their comfort zone in allowing it.

 

[GistoftheFist]

Of course it isnt justified!

Because... SAUSAGE!

You are fishing for trolls and/or flamers.

I am just giving you what you want...

Kielbasa! >:I

 

[Impluse_101]

Here in Oklahoma....

"This land is my land~ This isn't your land. I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one. I'll blow your head off~ If you don't get off. This land was made for me not you~"

....

Thank my friend for giving me that little ditty. I thought this was appropriate.

 

[anthony87]

First off, this has nothing to do with being in the US, it is because Oklahoma has a "make my day" law; if someone is trespassing on your personal property (or maybe just your house, I don't remember), the homeowner has every legal right to use lethal force.

That Oklahoma and much of the US has legalised murder, doesn't change the fact that it was most likely murder. Laws aren't self-justifying.

Besides, didn't you just claim they broke in to find medication, meaning they were after getting high? Then they were clearly no threat. Their intent was not do harm, but to steal something. No run of the mill burglar would engage in violence as it would only add to their possible punishment.

But apparently for that mother, if you want to steal something, anything, even something totally useless to her, that is reason enough to commit murder. To end someone's life, deny him everything else he could've had, and to throw an entire family into mourning.

Well mom, I hope you have fun with that medication worth $ 0 to you. I also hope your child never wakes up in the night and goes for a glass of water, only to be shot dead by his own paranoid mom. Certainly wouldn't be the first time some gun nut kills their own family thinking they're someone else.

Mind if I have your address? Seeing as how you're against self-defense of any kind I figured I may as well try stealing some stuff from your house. Don't worry though, I'm not gonna harm you or threaten you in anyway so it's totally okay by your logic right?

 

[Malyc]

Shooting justified. I would have done the same in her situation (difference is, my shotgun is in my gunsafe at my parents house. I would have had to use the handgun, and probably woulda shot more than once)
Edit* make that would have had to shoot more than once. Only fools think that one bullet is a guranteed stop.

 

[iLikeHippos]

I am glad the mother and her son are unharmed and can possibly find peace to recuperate from the death of their father-figure. When you back a wolf into a corner, it will bite back, desperate, and obviously she was not in a greater position to shout a warning.

 

[kurupt87]

Snip

The tragedy is that it'd be worse for her had she done what's best, left her room once she'd got the shotty calling,

"Alright fuckers," as she lets of a blast into a wall (letting them know she's either serious or mental), "I'm ready!".

If she'd done that they'd have scarpered, but her insurance would not have paid for the damage to the wall from her blast. It's better to kill the intruder than scare them off.

 

[chuppy]

They had no excuse for invading her home. I might say something controversial here, but, in my opinion, if anyone breaks into your house for whatever purpose, you may kill them. Why should she be thinking about a peaceful resolution? Why didn't THEY just MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS and leave her alone?

We allow criminals to have way too many rights. I mean, seriously, I'm being attacked and I'm the one charged for defending myself? Yeah, maybe they'll just leave me with a blue eye and hospitalization fees to pay, but maybe, just maybe, they will leave me dead. How can I know? And why should I risk it?

No, if you attack me, especially with a weapon, then I may kill you to defend myself. That's how laws should be. You had no reason to attack me.

And about that incident with the kid and the pellet gun... He was way over the line and he was given the chance to save himself. He didn't listen to the cops. They were right not to risk their lives and shoot him. He had no reason for scaring the whole school and disobeying their orders. He brought it upon himself.

Whatever cops do, we always blame them for not doing their job right. But we don't look at the real problem. Criminals get off easy, which is encouraging other people to become criminals too.

 

[Malyc]

I would call it justified, though if it was me i would have blasted out thier knees instead of merely killing them.

well when its a woman and her baby, their isnt much option, especially since he had a knife, he could have decided to just have crawled to them.
also, leg wounds can be equally lethal.

I dont think you understand how much a mangled knee can hurt, my sister tore hers up pretty badly (internally) in early 2011, when the doctors finally decided something was wrong and took her to hospital i could hear her sreaming in pain over the ambulance siren, while we were on opposite sides of the ambulance.

On a side note, if you must know what i mean by "finally decided something was wrong" she had an unusual injury to her kneecap that didnt show up on X-ray, so they decided she was overreacting and sent her home. MRI scan fixed that though, and many words were had shortly afterwards, most of them angry swears.

Also if someone could put up with that kind of pain to get close enough to be a danger, i still have a shotgun. Loaded or not i could just gun butt him in the back of the head to knock him out, and disarm him in the meantime.

Two things.
1) There were two intruders.
2) She had a baby.

That changes the situation drastically. She wasn't just protecting herself, but also her son. Taking chances would be foolish. Especially with two people to contend with.

Well running over the situation in my head, the only real trouble would be if the shotgun was a single shot then reload thing that only American red necks and English bird hunters seem to desperately cling onto.

Simply this, two intruders, at least two shots from a shotgun. Even a novice shooter would find it hard to miss at a distance of less than 5 meters with a shotgun.

Anyway, hopefully your sister is better and no worse for the wear.

Well she made pretty much a full recovery, and is now understandably very cautious of the same thing ever happening again.

You'd be surprised at just how hard it is too hit your target under that much pressure. Also, as every cop, soldier, security guard and anyone who has ever taken a shooting class knows, you ALWAYS aim center mass. Not because it is a lethal area to shoot, but because it is the largest target on the human body. Shooting to wound is a falsehood best confined to hollywood.

 

[BrassButtons]

That Oklahoma and much of the US has legalised murder, doesn't change the fact that it was most likely murder. Laws aren't self-justifying.

Murder means an unlawful killing (more specifically, it is an unlawful killing with "malice aforethought"). Legal murder does not exist, for the same reason legal crimes don't exist. The term implies criminality. Your repeated use of the term is an emotional appeal.

Their intent was not do harm, but to steal something.

What should she have done to determine if they were actually intending to do her or her child harm? If she waits for them to actually attack things could go very badly for her or her child.

EDIT: Also, haven't you been arguing in another thread [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.337267-15-year-old-Stabs-Bully-11-Times-at-Bus-Stop-Gets-Away-With-It?page=17#13638760] that having a weapon shows intent to commit murder? The burglars had knives, so doesn't that mean they planned to kill her?

But apparently for that mother, if you want to steal something, anything, even something totally useless to her, that is reason enough to commit murder.

Prove that she had a reasonable way of knowing they only wanted to steal something.

Well mom, I hope you have fun with that medication worth $ 0 to you. I also hope your child never wakes up in the night and goes for a glass of water, only to be shot dead by his own paranoid mom.

Why is it paranoid to shoot an armed intruder?

Certainly wouldn't be the first time some gun nut kills their own family thinking they're someone else.

What makes her a gun nut?

Anyway, can I add to the make believe version of events?
They were Snake-Men riding a T-Rex.

Yes! And they were accompanied by a gang of Dire Badgers dual-wielding greatswords.

 

[Spartan448]

For the 15-year-old stabbing the bully, that was excessive. The Florida law was born out of pure stupidity and ignorant pride that is common in the American South and Midwest. Yes, the kid was entitled to self-defense, however, not using deadly force. There was CLEARLY no evidence to show that the kid was in immediate danger of death or permanently crippling injury, and he certainly has no right to commit MURDER.

As for the mother, that actually IS illegal. By law, you are required to use a weapon that is capable of destroying or disabiling vechicles of Armored Personnel Carrier size or larger with a single shot.

As for the kid with the pellet gun, that was a recepie for disaster. The pellet gun actually IS classified as a deadly weapon in some states (Including my native New York), and then add into the mix that this is Texas, the single biggest police state in the world.

 

[Saltyk]

I said nothing about the victims, didn't mention that. I simply said that criminals aren't bad people and don't deserve to die or live in prison for the rest of their life.

...........

criminals aren't bad people

buddy....have you ever heard of people like Ed Gien, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and John Wayne Gacy?

The fact that people like those 4 existed in this world removes anything valid from that sentence.

Let us look at Jeffrey Dahmer, the man was diagnosed with several mental illnesses (I think it was a form in psychosis to be specific).

They're pretty sure Ted Bundy had bipolar or something along those lines

Ed Gein was abused in childhood and was raised to think that all women were prostitutes

John Wayne Gacy was molested and abused in childhood

These aren't people who are commiting crime because they're soulless bastards, they commit the crime because of their own serious problems, problems that prison should try to address.

Those are mere explanations for what they did. Not excuses. They should still be made accountable for their actions. No matter what the reasons, when you break the law, you should be punished. This is why justice is said to be blind. Justice doesn't care why you killed people, had sex with the dead bodies, and then ate them. It just cares that you did. Jeffery Dahmer, in case you forgot.

Then justice is wrong. That seems like a lame argument I know, but it's what I think.

This seems relevant.

It's pretty obvious he is a monster in this video. I guarantee you that if he were allowed to leave prison after being "healed" he would have murdered again. Even he admitted he deserved to be punished for his crimes. He wasn't some ill person. He was pretty damn smart. Seriously, you can tell he's telling the interviewer what he wants to hear more than anything. There's probably some truth to it, but the best lies have elements of truth to them.

 

[Saltyk]

First off, this has nothing to do with being in the US, it is because Oklahoma has a "make my day" law; if someone is trespassing on your personal property (or maybe just your house, I don't remember), the homeowner has every legal right to use lethal force.

That Oklahoma and much of the US has legalised murder, doesn't change the fact that it was most likely murder. Laws aren't self-justifying.

Besides, didn't you just claim they broke in to find medication, meaning they were after getting high? Then they were clearly no threat. Their intent was not do harm, but to steal something. No run of the mill burglar would engage in violence as it would only add to their possible punishment.

But apparently for that mother, if you want to steal something, anything, even something totally useless to her, that is reason enough to commit murder. To end someone's life, deny him everything else he could've had, and to throw an entire family into mourning.

Well mom, I hope you have fun with that medication worth $ 0 to you. I also hope your child never wakes up in the night and goes for a glass of water, only to be shot dead by his own paranoid mom. Certainly wouldn't be the first time some gun nut kills their own family thinking they're someone else.

So, if someone breaks into your house and starts stealing your stuff what are you going to do? Help them carry it to their car so they don't strain their back?

Also hyperbole. Yay! It's so much fun! Let me try.
Everyone is a killer! Everywhere! You all deserve to be punished for your terrible crimes!

Anyway, can I add to the make believe version of events?
They were Snake-Men riding a T-Rex.

Yes! And they were accompanied by a gang of Dire Badgers dual-wielding greatswords.

And Mimes that sang songs about Great Pandas.

 

[Sylveria]

Forum members say a 15 year old stabbing an attacker 11 times is excessive, or police shooting a kid with a pellet gun three times is excessive, so was this justified in your eyes?

100% justified in every single case. There is far too much "The attacker has rights to" garbage in this country. When you're in the act of trying to harm another human being, nearly all your right should go out the window, and right to life is one of them.

If you point a a gun at a cop, fake or not, you know what can happen.
If you try to beat some kid to death, you deserve whatever happens to you.
If you break into someone's home with a weapon, you deserve whatever happens to you.

I only wish US self defense laws were more broad. You see far too many instances of people getting charged for "excessive force" when they were defending themselves or someone else from an attacker. Anything short of shooting a fleeing attacker in the back from a LONG distance should be considered within the limits of acceptable force. In my mind, as long as they're in your home or your face, anything you do to them should be fair game.

 

[drthmik]

they should give her a metal and some money for being so incompetent as to make her wait for over 20 minutes on the phone with 911

I have seen that some people think the US has legalized murder
this is the furthest from the truth
In the US you can defend yourself and others from being murdered without being labeled a murderer
it is in the countries that legally require people to not defend themselves where murder is legal

some people have the most bizarre sense of "Justice" they think it's OK for a rapist or murderer to break in to a persons house to rape or murder them but if they defend themselves they are labeled a "murderer" and thrown in prison as if their refusal to be the victim of the true criminal.